Preamble

The House met at Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

SOUTHEND CORPORATION BILL [Lords].

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir WALTER de FRECE: I do not want to make a speech on this Motion, but only to say that the Southend Corporation have accepted the proposed Instruction to the Committee, thus falling in with the Government view.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a Second time, and committed.

Ordered,
That it be an instruction to the Committee on the Bill that they shall have regard to the provisions of Section 56 of the Public Health Act, 1925, so far as Clause 25, Sub-section 2A, is concerned."—[Sir W. de Frece.]

Falmouth Docks Bill [Lords.],

Read the Third time, and passed, without Amendment.

Trent Falls Improvement Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered: to be read the Third time.

Bristol Corporation Bill (by Order),

Order for consideration, as amended, read;

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered":

Question amended, by leaving out from the word "That," to the end of the Question, and adding the words "notwithstanding the fact that the allowance of a term of eighty years for the repayment of certain loans is contrary to Standing Order 173a, this House having regard to the special circumstances mentioned in the Report of the Committee,
orders the Bill to be now considered,"— [The Chairman of Ways and Means.]—instead thereof, and, as amended, agreed to.

Bill, as amended, considered accordingly.

Ordered, That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the Third time.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]

King's Consent signified; Bill read the Third time, and passed.

Manchester Ship Canal (General Powers) Bill [Lords] by (Order).

Second Reading deferred till Friday next.

North Berwick Burgh Extension Order Confirmation Bill [Lords], considered; to he read the Third time upon Monday next.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury what he proposes shall be done in connection with the Resolution handed in yesterday, and whether it will require a re-arrangement of the business?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Commander Eyres Monsell): Yes, Sir: a re-arrangement will be necessary.
On Monday we shall take, as the first Order, the discussion on the Motion standing in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition [Ministers of the Crown]; Report of Supplementary Estimates; Report and Third Reading of the Land Drainage Bill [Lords], Markets and Fairs (Weighing of Cattle) Bill [Lords] and Petroleum Bill [Lords]; and other Orders on the Paper.
Tuesday, Supply—Ministry of Health Vote.
Wednesday, Supply—Post Office Vote until 8.15 p.m., and Ministry of Transport Vote until 11 p.m.
On Thursday, Finance Bill, completion of Report stage.
The business for Friday will be announced later.
If time permit on any day next week, progress will be made with small Bills on the Paper.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: Is it intended to suspend the Eleven o'Clock Rule on Monday?

Commander EYRES MONSELL: I think it probably will be necessary.

FORESTRY BILL [Lords].

Read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to he printed. [Bill 154.]

COLWYN BAY AND COLWYN URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [Lords] (CHANGED TO "COLWYN BAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [Lords]").

Reported. with Amendments [Title amended], from the Local Legislation Committee (Section A); Report to li[...]e upon the Table, and to be printed.

EXPIRING LAWS BILL,

"to continue certain Expiring Laws," presented by Mr. RONALD Mc NEILL; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 154.]

Orders of the Day — BOARDS OF GUARDIANS (DEFAULT) BILL.

Further considered in Committee [Progress, 8th July].

Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.

CLAUSE 1.—(Proceedings on default by board of guardians.)

Mr. GROVES: I beg to move, in page 2, line 12, to leave out from the word "made," to the end of Sub-section (2), and to insert instead thereof the words
but shall not come into operation unless and until it has been approved either with or without modification by resolution passed by each House of Parliament.
We move this Amendment because we consider that this Bill, if put into operation on the volition of the Minister, will transgress the commonly accepted application of the Constitution of this country. I do not view this as a trifling matter. Although I am not an expert in putting forward points on the Constitution, I feel that it is an interference with the old traditions of local government, and that, if the House of Commons gives its consent to the future imposition of the will of any Minister—I make no particular reflection upon the present Minister, but any Minister—it is an indirect and undue interference with the rights of local authorities. I should have liked to dilate upon this from my own point of view, because I feel that the development of local life in this country for many centuries past has been the centre from which the great theory of freedom and democracy has been built up. I believe that the old shire life in this country was the centre from which all that we understand to be the expression of democratic thought and life has grown up, and interference by the central authority in the way which this Bill is going to permit will in my opinion be very inimical to freedom and to the expression of thought in this country. That is why I view it, not as a trifling thing, but as a great constitutional matter.
If I wanted support in this direction, I should go to the speech of the right hon.
Gentleman himself, delivered, I think, last Monday or Tuesday at Birmingham. I have not the report of that speech here, but, speaking from memory, the right hon. Gentleman gave very glowing praise to the theory of the value and development of local government in this country, and I think he hinted, if he did not categorically state, that any interference with local government would tend in the direction of bringing down the value of the expression of thought. If those are not literally the correct words, that is the impression, that is the feeling, and I thoroughly agree with the right hon. Gentleman. The development of local life in this country is in my opinion one of the best safety valves for the expression of thought, and I believe that in nearly every quarter of the House we should get support for the view that any change such as is contemplated in this Bill should not become operative until it has been agreed to by both Houses of Parliament.
My second point is that the application of the present Bill is in a sense an intimidation of local authorities. A learned Judge, in dealing with intimidation in the Courts yesterday, said that it would "strangle the normal life and growth of freedom." I believe that this Bill will strangle the normal life of local government, and, therefore, I press this Amendment, because it will be a deterrent to the imposition by any Minister of his power and his departmental will upon local authorities. The history of our country proves that the life of which we are all proud, whatever may be our politics—the social life and development of our country—has grown up through the ages, and even William the Conqueror, when he came here in 1066, while he did make an attack upon the central Government, took good care to leave local life in the shires as he found it, because he realised that, through the functions of local life, we do get a development which makes for the strength of the country. Some people may think that they have nothing to do with this particular Bill, but they have. These are vital points, because the experiences of local life in the past century have been very important in their impressions upon the great growth of the social conscience and social fabric of our country. I feel that anything done here which is
going to bring that down is against the expression of the thought and liberty of our people.
The application of this Bill to the West Ham Union is going to repress, and the act of repression is a constitutional error. Even if the West Ham Guardians were wrong, there must be other ways whereby Parliament can, so to speak, put a check upon Guardians with whose action they do not agree, and check any extravagance; but I think this way of doing it is a constitutional error. I hope that the Minister will accept my remarks as being made in perfect sincerity, and will try to mould, shall I say, the working of this Bill in accordance with the views which this Amendment seeks to express. I wonder, Mr. Hope, whether you would just permit me, in order to avoid the necessity for my rising again, to amplify and extend a statement that I made yesterday. If so, I need not trouble the Committee again. I made a statement which in a sense put the Minister in a position in which I did not desire to place him.

The CHAIRMAN: I think the proper place to raise that would be on the Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Mr. GROVES: I will bring my remarks to a close, and hope they will be considered.

Mr. TINKER: I wish to ask the Minister if he has had a communication from the Association of Poor Law Unions. I understand a communication has been sent to him asking him not to use his authority without getting the consent of Parliament. This matter is too vital altogether for any Minister of the Crown to have full power to do what he likes. It is so serious that this House should determine what course should be adopted in a case like that. I should like to know what answer he has given to the questions put to him by the Association.

Mr. ATTLEE: I want to support the Amendment, which is to try to bring the operations of the Minister more closely under the review of the House, because I believe we are embarking here on an exceedingly dangerous experiment. I do not think the House is taking this Bill sufficiently seriously. There is an
extraordinary habit among Conservative Ministers, who are supporters of the Constitution, to brush aside all constitutional practices and constitutional theory when they find they cannot get something exactly as they wish it. We had an example a few Parliaments ago in the action of the present First Lord of the Admiralty, which cost the country a good deal of money, and in the same way we had action by the Minister of Health which has certainly been contrary to the spirit of the statutes laid down by the House in his constant interference under one pretext or another with the actions of boards of guardians. I regard this Bill as an attack on the whole fabric of local government. I want to warn the Minister that this has been done before, and the person who did it came to a very bad end. Students of history will remember that there was an occasion when this country fell under despotic rule in which the charters of all our towns went down one after another under the assault of no less a person than Judge Jeffreys. The Minister is going to take various boards of guardians. I warn him how he deals with Stepney, because Judge Jeffreys came to a very bad end in Wapping, and when he comes to deal with Stepney let him think what happened to his predecessor.

The CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Gentleman is not Lord Chief Justice.

Mr. ATTLEE: I quite agree that the right hon. Gentleman is not Lord Chief Justice but he holds a very analogous position to that which Judge Jeffreys held under James I as apparently a most forcible instrument, for inflicting the sort of treatment that the Government of the day thinks should be meted out to the people of this country. It has been pointed out that this matter is not going to stop at boards of guardians. What we are going to have is an intrusion into the whole fabric of local government. We are going to have the Ministers of the central government taking over local government functions, and they are going to demand that money should be raised for the actions of what is really part of the central government by the raising of rates by local authorities, and the result of that will be that the town councils will also refuse to act, and whenever this matter comes
before the House you are going to find that some particular area is going to pass from the hands of the local authorities into the hands of the central government. I have for long been an admirer and a supporter of our method of local self-government as compared with the method on the Continent, and I do not want to see our local government swept away by nominees of the Government being sent to do local work instead of the people of the locality. It is a very dangerous precedent. The right hon. Gentleman does not know what use may not be made of this by some of his successors. I believe he is a great believer in local government. He must remember that Ministers come arid Ministers go, and he may be succeeded by someone of an extreme red tint, or an extreme white tint. He has Napoleonic colleagues who might at some time come into power, and he might find Birmingham itself put under the heel of the central government.
It would be melancholy if a man of his position in local government were found to have been the instrument of killing local government throughout the country. We want to put every impediment in the way of the unrestrained use of power by the Minister of Health under this Bill. Certainly if any such order is to be made we want to have a very clear case made before the House. There should be an affirmative Resolution in order to provide full opportunities for discussion, because the great mass of the people believe this Bill is not primarily directed towards the defects of boards of guardians. There have been defective boards of guardians ever since boards of guardians existed. There are many boards of guardians who do not do their duty. If you study the list of questions put by Members in the House from all sides you will find cases raised of guardians who have been in default. But the general opinion on these benches, and I think in the country, is that this Bill is brought in, not because certain boards of guardians have been in default, not because of their defaults, but because they are of a certain political complexion. They regard it as merely an extension of the class war into the field of local government. That is a very dangerous thing. I myself should protect the rights of a local governing authority, even though it was not a Labour majority, even though it
was a Conservative one, because we have built up in this country the principle that the people of a locality have the right to decide how they should he governed. This Bill is one of a large number of steps which have been adopted of recent years to crib, cabin and confine our local governing authorities. It is a very dangerous precedent, and I hope the House will accept the Amendment.

Mr. THURTLE: I think this Amendment deserves the general support of the Committee. It seeks to give Parliament the opportunity of considering whether or not the drastic step of issuing an order by the Minister of Health is justified. I think Parliament ought at least to reserve that power to itself. The Clause as it stands does provide that any prolongation of the Order may be considered by Parliament. Parliament is to have an opportunity of considering whether the Order should be extended for a further period of six months. There is an even stronger case for arguing that Parliament should be entitled to say whether or not the Order should originally be allowed to come into effect. In conferring this power upon the Minister, Parliament is indulging in something of the nature of a constitutional innovation, and a very dangerous constitutional innovation, because it is giving the Minister power to take away from the electors their right to elect their local authorities. This Parliament is only going to consent to this Measure because it believes that it is a last desperate kind of expedient, and that the Minister of Health cannot deal with the situation without something of this sort. If it is that kind of last desperate expedient, Parliament ought certainly to reserve to itself the right to consider whether the Minister is wisely or unwisely exercising the very grave power which is being conferred upon him.
Ministers of Health may differ. It may be that the present Minister of Health will exercise this power judiciously and well, and it may he that other Ministers of Health will do exactly the same thing. They will realise that this power has only been conferred upon them as a last desperate expedient, and will use it in that sense. But it is quite conceivable that we may have some Minister of Health, a jack in office, who because he
has this power feels that it is his duty to use it, and he may take advantage of the power and issue an Order, although there may be no justification for the Order being issued. It is because of that kind of danger that Parliament should reserve the power to see whether or not the Minister is exercising his discretion wisely or not. It is on that account that we wish this Amendment to be inserted in the Clause.
It is the habit of the British Constitution to introduce checks and balances. We do not believe in unrestricted power. The Constitution as it stands at present does not believe in unrestricted power. This House, sovereign though it ought to be, is restricted to some extent by certain restraints and vetoes. If there is a case for restraint upon the power of the sovereign House of Parliament, there ought to be some restraint upon the power of the Minister, and especially when that power will enable the Minister to take away from districts rights of self-government which they have exercised for a very long time. The Minister ought to recognise that there is no hardship involved in this proposal. If any Order which he issue commands the support of Parliament; if Parliament believes that it is a wise Order and an Order justified by the conditions which obtain in the particular locality, Parliament will certainly approve of it; but if Parliament does not think it is a wide Order, if Paliament thinks the Minister is making a serious mistake and ought not to have gone to the length of resorting to this drastic step, then Parliament, if they are given this right, will say to the Minister, "You are not justified in issuing this Order, and we do not intend to allow you to proceed with it." If the general view of Parliament in a case of that sort is that the Minister ought not to be allowed to issue the Order, then Parliament ought to have an opportunity of saying so.

Mr. PALIN: I hope the Minister will give very careful consideration to this Amendment. Like many of my colleagues, I have been a member of a Board of Guardians. I shall be very glad to see hoards of guardians abolished, but not in this way. I think the whole system of poor law is bad. I differ from the Minister when he stated the other day that people who are in receipt of relief take a very
great interest in elections for boards of guardians, and that they vote for those who will give the largest scale of relief. That is contrary to all the facts of my experience. One of the reasons why I want to see boards of guardians abolished, is because people do not vote. People who have, unfortunately, to go to the guardians have reached a point when they have lost all hope in the world and have no interest in politicsor anything else. It is such a soul destroying business going for relief that I want to see some system which will enable people to retain their self-respect andcontinue to take an interest in politics and to vote at elections.
The last people in the world to vote at a guardians election are the people in receipt of relief. In my own constituency last year, to show the utter apathy of the class of people more directly concerned, the Newcastle Corporation proposed to appeal to this House for power to construct some very important streets, which would find work for thousands of people for a long period. Certain vested interests took exception to the corporation corning to this House, and a plebescite of the citizens was taken, and although there are many thousands of unemployed in Newcastle, they did not even trouble to go to vote themselves a job. Wherever we look, I maintain that the statement that people will vote for those who will give them a higher scale of relief is not true, because they do not vote at all.
I would not hesitate to give the Minister power as far as his own record in local government is concerned. Like his respected father, he has a good record in municipal life, but I am sorry to say that that good record is rapidly being dispersed by his administration at the Ministry of Health. When he came here he had a good character, but he is losing it very rapidly. I should be very sorry to think that, with his democratic associations, he should be one of the first to revert to that system of dictatorship which is now applying in one or two countries across the channel. We must be very careful how we start the descent of the slippery slope towards a dictatorship. It is only a petty dictatorship this power to disestablish Boards of Guardians, but I am afraid that his friends
behind him, who have less experience than he has, will seize upon this precedent, until we find ourselves with a Mussolini installed in the Ministry of Health. That is a prospect that we cannot contemplate with any degree of serenity. Therefore, I trust that this Amendment will be considered very carefully by the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. SNELL: I desire to add my appeal to the Government that they should seriously consider the effect of this Amendment. It would relieve the minds of hon. Members on this side of the House of some apprehension. Although the discussion has been concerning one locality, the problem is not really a local one; it affects a wider area, and may affect additional areas in this country in the future. What really troubles us on this side is that the Measure implies a censure on British local government; it expresses a distrust of those who have been elected to fulfil very important and solemn services. I agree that the record of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health in local government is one which we cannot seriously criticise up to recent times. There is no name which stands higher in the annals of local government than the name he bears and some of us remember, when we were boys how we were inspired by what his distinguished father did in the city of Birmingham. I cannot think what his suppressed fury would be like in attacking any Minister who would dare to apply to any town in Warwickshire the principles which the Minister of Health is seeking to apply to West Ham to-day. West Ham is a locality in which there are extraordinary difficulties. If the hoard of guardians had been as wise as the right hon. Gentleman would have them, as parsimonious as they might have been, there would still have been a vast expenditure in that area. I regret that the West Ham guardians have been reviled on account of their shortcomings without taking account of the great difficulties they have to meet. This measure is a reflection on the honour of people who have been doing their best in quite extraordinary circumstances. When I have visited other countries it has been a great pride to me to be able to say that our local government is pure, that there is no sort of
corruption, but I feel, if the House of Commons gives support to this Measure, that I shall have to hesitate.

The CHAIRMAN: This is rather wide of the Amendment.

Mr. SNELL: I will bring myself nearer to it by saying that the House of Commons should have the power to decide whether the Order should be put into operation or not. We are not asking the Government to do any great thing. The Amendment will preserve the authority of this House, and if the Minister of Health will only trust the honour of this House he will not be disappointed.

Sir BEDDOE REES: I should not intervene in this debate to-day but for the fact that this Amendment is one to which I referred yesterday. My criticism is that there are no safeguards in the Bill; at least the safeguards are not sufficient. I suggested yesterday that if the Minister of Health could accept this Amendment, I should be quite satisfied, because we on this side are not opposed to the principle of the Bill. We want, however, to see it amended in such a way as will give Parliament the right to say whether an Order shall be put in force or not. If it was merely a question of the West Ham Union, a Bill dealing with one circumstance, it would receive the support of the majority of our party, but, as the Amendment I moved yesterday was not accepted, I think this is the best thing we can do. All it asks is that when an Order is made, it shall be laid on the Table of the House, and the House asked to approve it. That is merely a reversion of the order as suggested in the Bill. The Bill says that an Order shall be laid on the Table of the House, and if there is a Resolution of either House against it, then the Order shall not apply. We want to turn that the other way round; that an Order shall be laid on the Table and the House should approve it by a definite Resolution. That will be much more satisfactory. I see nothing in the Amendment to which the Government can object. I wonder what would have happened if this Bill had been introduced by the Labour Party. I am sure hon. Members opposite would have been very loud in their condemnation of an attempt to suppress the administration of the Poor Law. This Bill is interfering with what we under-
stand as democratic control. We ask that the powers of the Minister should be limited, and I hope the Government will accept it.

Mr. VIANT: I desire to support the Amendment, and I am at a loss to understand why the Minister is not prepared to accept it. The Bill gives him very wide powers, quite unprecedented powers as far as local government of this country is concerned. Hitherto it has been our boast that democratic government is one of the best safeguards in this country, but it now appears we have arrived at a stage when democratic government is to be set aside. Those who support this Amendment feel that these powers ought not to be conferred upon any Minister whatever. Public opinion is not behind this Bill, and local authorities are not behind this Bill. Those who are responsible for local government work in this country view the Measure with considerable apprehension. They feel that there is far more behind this Bill than appears on the surface, and that no Minister of the Crown ought to ask for power of this kind without being prepared to accept the democratic safeguard for which we are asking in the Amendment. The Association of Poor Law Unions yesterday passed a resolution in support of the principle of this Amendment, and I am given to understand that a copy was sent to the Minister of Health. I hope that in his reply he will give the House some reason for his not being prepared to accept the principles embodied in the Amendment. We are not asking for anything extraordinary.
I believe it is the constitutional practice of this House, when setting up a semi-public or semi-democratic authority responsible to a Minister of this House, for provisions to he inserted in the Bill embodying precisely the same principle as we have embodied in this Amendment, so that the House is not compelled to wait until the Vote of the Minister's Office or Department is under discussion, but Members of the House can take the initiative in discussing the conduct of the Minister in question. This Amendment would be as much a safeguard for the Minister as for the local government authorities throughout the country, in so far as it would enable him to feel
at least that, when he was about to issue an order, by virtue of the fact that he had the sanction of the House before the order was put into operation, he had the backing of both Houses of Parliament. In that way he would be keeping in touch with the public opinion of the country. Most of us feel that if this Bill is put into operation, it will violate the constitutional practice of the country.
In the public press and by hon. Gentlemen opposite, we on this side of the House have been accused from time to time of being prepared to adopt unconstitutional methods, but here you have a classic instance of the so-called constitutional party, when certain things have not met with their favour, being prepared to go to unconstitutional lengths for the purpose of getting their own way. This innovation will not be for the good of the country. I believe that we stand to gain most by the use of constitutional methods, and if the so-called constitutional party are going to set up a precedent of this kind. I am rather inclined to fear that the day is not far off when other people will be prepared to use the precedent for adopting unconstitutional methods also. I would appeal not to the Minister but rather to the House, to back this Amendment in order that the necessary safeguard might be placed in the Bill and that those who are responsible for local government throughout the country may have the assurance that both Houses of Parliament will consider whatever orders may be issued under the Bill before they come into operation.

Mr. KELLY: I support the Amendment. I cannot understand why the Government are not accepting this opportunity of consulting the House of Commons before putting into operation any of the ideas which they have in their mind. It appears that it is the intention of the Ministry of Health to do something upon which it fears to face the House before putting an Order into operation. How can the Government justify to the country the change that is suggested, and at the same time refuse to allow the House of Commons to have a voice regarding the Orders which dispense with the democratic method of dealing with the Poor Law? We find the Government and the friends of the
Government asking, on other Measures, that where their interests are affected the House shall have an opportunity of expressing an opinion on an Order before it comes into operation. Now that the interests of the poor people only are affected, the Minister of Health is to issue an Order which will be put on the Table, and after 21 days of its operation the Order can be annulled. What has happened in the meantime seems to be of little concern to the Minister. I hope that, even if the Minister is not prepared to accept the Amendment, hon. Members opposite, who have been so strong where their interests are concerned in seeing that the House of Commons expresses itself in the first instance, will support the Amendment.

Miss LAWRENCE: I want to call the mind of the Committee to what this Bill is, as defined by the Minister himself, in order to prove how necessary it is that there should be Parliamentary control. I shall quote the speech of the Minister in this House. He said:
The basis of this Bill is that, if the authority lends Boards of Guardians money, it is necessary that the authority should lay down the condition on which the money should he spent.
Earlier in his speech he said that the loan was obtained from the taxpayer, and the taxpayer had no control over the money and the present system. That appears to me to be a sort of distorted reflection of the correct theory of grants, which the Minister knows as well as anyone else. If the taxpayers' money goes to local authorities, Parliament votes the money, and the money is administered under conditions of which Parliament approves. The idea that a Minister should be able to prescribe conditions with regard to public money without communicating with Parliament and without any reference to Parliament, is a. thing alien to the whole principle of local government. The boards of guardians which are involved are some 40 to 60 in number. They rule the greatest and most important industrial centres in the country. The Bill sets the Minister free to do something which no Minister has ever had power to do with regard to the poor, that is to lay down conditions with regard to relief. Invariably when public money is given to any local authority the condition on which that money is given is something on which Parliament has
always asserted control. In particular, where the Minister is adventuring into it new field, where he is laying down correct principles of relief, a thing which Parliament itself has never touched, it surely becomes all the more desirable that Parliament should know what is going on, and should have the conditions laid on the Table and should know about the Regulations.
I ask anyone to look at the analogy of education. When we started education grants, did anyone imagine that the Minister of Education should lay down what conditions he pleased? Not at all. The Code has to be laid on the Table. The Regulations have to be approved by Parliament. The idea of letting a Minister loose to dispose of as much public money as he likes, without any necessity to consult the taxpayer, without any necessity to place his regulations before Parliament; to let him loose to make unlimited loans, if he likes, without consulting anybody, to allow him, if he likes, to lay down conditions such as would be unbearable—cannot anyone see what a negation that is of all the sound principles which up to now have governed the relations between Parliament and the municipalities? The Minister spoke affectionately, almost, of the taxpayer. What protection has the taxpayer, if the Minister is to sanction loans, as he says himself, from the taxpayers' money, and is to do so without any reference to Parliament? What protection has Parliament against a wholesale reduction or a wholesale rise in the scales of relief, when Parliament is kept in utter and purposed ignorance of the conditions which the Minister may lay down?
It is a very bad thing to have a local administration which can be entirely reversed by a change in the political colour of this House? Hon. Members opposite have asked what would happen if we got in? I hope if we got in we should repeal this Measure, but, if we did not, if we were so infected by the contagion of despotism as to administer this Measure what would happen? In my more frivolous moments I sometimes picture to myself how very interesting it would be to take the people who are experienced in sound principles of local administration and local finance in Poplar and put them to administer some of the other boards
of guardians which refuse out-relief. It is not a thing we should ever do, but the possibilities are excessively interesting and excessively amusing. Surely it is a pity to put powers in the hands of the Executive which might be misused. Under this power it would be possible to upset the whole tradition of local administration and to send down to these local bodies people who are, in their whole spirit and outlook upon life utterly different from the persons whose fortunes they would have to administer. This could all be done, not under any code of regulations laid upon the Table of the House of Commons, but at the will of the Minister sitting in his office or ostensibly at his will. We all know how these things are done in practice and we know it would not even be at the will of the Parliamentary Secretary, but at the will of some official. It is idle to suppose that all these regulations and conditions will even go before the Minister. In fact, we are handing over to the bureaucracy of Whitehall powers which Parliament had never conferred even on any Minister.

Captain W. BENN: There is a governing consideration in the minds of hon. Gentlemen opposite in reference to this and other Amendments. It is a growing practice to avoid an ordinary parliamentary stage of a Measure of this kind by refusing any Amendments whatever in the Committee stage, however reasonable they may be. This is done with the idea of avoiding a Report stage, which would be necessary if Amendments were made to the Bill. So far as I am concerned, this is not essentially a West Ham Bill. I know very little about the West Ham situation. I have read about it in the newspapers, and I observe that Amendments have been moved from this side of the House asking that a Select Committee should be appointed, which of course would investigate West Ham or any other union. I am not particularly concerned however to defend West Ham and I profess ignorance of that particular subject, but this is a general Bill. This is what I would call an Italian Bill. It is the Italian spirit which is infecting the family. When the brother of the right hon. Gentleman went to Rapallo he was received with joy, quite naturally,
by the local Fascisti and took from their hands a floral trophy to which compliment he suitably replied. No doubt, in family conclaves when he returned, the excellent methods employed in Italy were spread and took root in the more receptive minds of the family.

The CHAIRMAN: If I allowed this argument to proceed. I should have to admit a speech from some enthusiastic friend of Signor Mussolini.

12 N.

Captain BENN: I submit there is a certain relevance in it. This system is in existence in Italy, and only two days ago an interesting announcement was made by the Italian Government. They had brought in a system of central commissions to carry on local government as a temporary measure, and they gave out a few clays ago that they were going to dispense with local elections and allow these central commissions to continue. That is relevant because it is exactly the same thing as that which the right hon. Gentleman proposes in this Measure. We have to bear in mind, as I say, that this is not really a West Ham Bill, but is a Bill to effect a great change in the whole system of local government. One cannot forget that there are influences at work in the Conservative party which are anxious to change the scale of relief given by boards of guardians. It is impossible to overlook that fact. At a meeting of one of the most important Conservative Associations in this country only a few days ago, at which both the hon. Members for the City of London were present, Lord Hunsdon said in his judgment it was a crime to relieve the destitution of people with whose industrial views he did not agree. That is his view, and it is not to be supposed that that opinion is not shared by some of the Members of the party opposite. It sheds a flood of light upon proposals such as this when we know that in their judgment the merits of an industrial dispute should be taken into account by guardians in the granting of relief.
This Amendment asks that the Parliamentary machine should have an opportunity of working. I cannot understand hon. Gentlemen who profess to be in favour of the power of the House of Commons refusing the House an opportunity, and particularly refusing to the Opposition in the House an opportunity
of ventilating grievances. It is the great safeguard which we have at this moment. This ought to be the place where, the moment any section of the public feels aggrieved, the matter may be raised, even though it may be raised without effectiveness or success. That is an essential principle, and it is more than ever necessary to-day when the power of Parliament is held by some to be in jeopardy. All that the Amendment proposes is that a Resolution should be passed giving the Minister the necessary authority. Is there anything revolutionary about that? If a Minister wants to put into force 31 emergency Regulations he cannot do so for a single month without corning to the House and getting a Resolution. Yet it is proposed here to take the power to abolish hundreds of locally-elected bodies without giving Parliament the opportunity of confirming that Act by Resolution.
What has the Minister to fear? Whatever Government be in power has a majority, and with a majority it can carry its way. Even this Government have a majority of sorts. What is the fear in the mind of the Minister when he resists this Amendment? It cannot be that he fears the result of the Division, because the results of all Divisions in this House are foregone conclusions. What he is afraid of is Debate. He says we can move a humble Address. Anyone who has ever tried to move a humble Address knows what the fate of it is. I have had most unfortunate experiences in that way in the early hours of the morning, and that is exactly what happens to the unfortunate individual who tries to move a humble Address in this House. It is exempted business, certainly, and a Member does not have to ask for time. He puts his Address on the Paper, and rises to move it, and naturally hon. Members who are put to great inconvenience by being kept at that hour of the night cry out "Divide, divide!" the Government Whips mysteriously appear on the back benches, Members opposite find business outside and within a short time 40 Members are not present, or there is such a state of hurry that no one can put the merits of the case effectively. It is because the Minister knows that that is the only safeguard that is being provided, this weak, ineffective, unsatisfactory method of
criticism, that he wants the Bill in its present form. All that is asked in this Amendment is a reasonable and Parliamentary demand, which should be supported by any friend of Parliament on any side of the House, without reference to West Ham or anywhere else. It merely asks the Government to put down their own Motion and submit it to Parliament at the proper time, and that it should require, after proper discussion, the assent of Parliament to the action which the Minister proposes to take.

Mr. J. HUDSON: I wish to support the Amendment. I am not going to say a word in favour of the Bill, but I know that a very serious state of things in local government has been created, not so much by the action of any guardians, as by the failure of hon. and right hon. Members opposite to carry out, in regard to unemployment and poverty, the promises they have been making these many years past. I pass from that to deal with the more specific constitutional issue with which this Amendment confronts the Government. When we, on these benches, have been talking about constitutional issues, there has been a disposition on the part of hon. Members opposite to smile, but their smiles are not as broad as ours at their contributions in regard to the Constitution. There is a fine passage, that I cannot quote from memory, in Carlyle[...]'s "French Revolution," in which he says, somewhat in this style, that Constitutions, whether they are made by men or fall from Heaven with fire, will not in the long run survive unless they minister to the needs of the people. In this case the Constitution has not survived the needs of a particular Government. It is not so much the needs of the people on this occasion, and it is certainly not the needs of the people of West Ham, that have been considered in this Bill.
The Government are in a particular difficulty, and in order to get out of it, irrespective of many other difficulties in which they will put themselves with regard to other local authorities, they have rushed wildly into this Bill, and they will create by it a constitutional precedent for which possibly they and other Governments will be extremely sorry at no very distant date. It was said last night that the Government are not merely
interfering with a board of guardians, not merely threatening to set up a new authority to take the place of a board of guardians, but that they will be driven step by step—even when they have brought in their new legislation, to set up municipal authorities to do the work of the present boards of guardians —first to interfere with the rating authorities, and ultimately with many other types of public authority, before they have done with this business. The Government are not getting rid of the difficulties with which they are confronted by setting up special Commissioners to carry on the work in West Ham.

The CHAIRMAN: This is rather far from the Amendment before the Com mittee, and would be more suitable for the Third Reading.

Mr. HUDSON: I was suggesting that difficulties are being created of such a serious nature that it will be necessary, step by step, as the Government proceed on their course, for Parliament to be consulted, and unless Parliament is brought into these questions, we shall find this country driven into an impu6st, and we shall find a breakdown of constitutional procedure so serious that we shall regret that power has not been given to Parliament to deal with these issues when they have been created. The right hon. Gentleman himself has said that he believes that when the new legislation is brought in—I suppose he believes it may be brought in so quickly—there will be only one or two occasions, or perhaps no occasion at all, in addition to this particular West irani incident, to deal with this matter. I see that he nods assent. Then why not, if there be only one ease that is likely to be dealt with, consent to give to Parliament this right of control when there is so little possibility of Parliament being brought in I suggest that, as we look at the matter differently from the right hon. Gentleman, and see many occasions when action of this sort will have to be aken, it would be an extremely wise step on this occasion to give Parliament the right of control and supervision.
This need of consulting Parliament is all the greater because the right hon. Gentleman has decided not only to do without the local help of the party that he does not like in West Ham, but he
has rejected every Amendment by which any type of local interest could be considered and included in the arrangements that are now being made. We brought in an Amendment yesterday to lay it down that those whom the Minister will call upon in this particular case shall be qualified by residence or by appearance on the registers at West Ham, but that was rejected, and what the right hon. Gentleman is going to do in this legislation is to put a million people in West Ham under the control of personages who have no knowledge of, and very probably no connection whatever with, West Ham interests, and who in the long run will be spending money, part of which at least—all of it, indeed—will have to be raised out of West Ham's rates.
This is such a serious constitutional issue from a financial point of view that I suggest there is an added reason why Parliament should he brought in stage by stage, and I am certain that, unless the Government can find it in their heart to accede to this request, they will bitterly regret. the day, for they a ill find. as the Constitution proceeds on its way, that there will be many other cases arise in which the interests of hon. Members opposite will be gravely imperilled by the action they are now taking. Not that we on these benches tray be concerned with imperilling their interests, for there are other people in the community who press a view regarding constitutional changes and whose views will be more readily listened to as the poverty of the people increases, as it seems to he likely to increase under the rule of the present Government. if that day should come, I suggest that the Government would have been glad of the protection of a Constitution which they are now scrapping by the action they are taking.

The MINISTER OF HEALTH (Mr. Neville Chamberlain): We have had twelve speeches on this Amendment and I think, perhaps, it is time that I put one or two considerations from the point of view of the Government. One would hardly have imagined, listening to the last speaker, for instance, that the Amendment was merely one to substitute for a proceeding under which the Houses of Parliament have to pass a Resolution against an Order of the Minister, a proceeding under which Parliament has to
pass a Resolution in favour of an Order. His speech, like so many others, was really a Secon Reading speech. It was directed against the main principles of the Bill, and whatever may be said for that point of view, it does not appear to me that this Amendment is one on which you can properly discuss that point. Hon. Members have taken the view that the powers given by the Bill to the Minister of Health might, perhaps, be exercised reasonably by the present occupant of the office, but not reasonably by a successor. I think that is a great compliment. One hon. Member has likened me to Judge Jeffreys.

Captain BENN: I understood, Mr. Hope, that it was a Standing Order of this House that no word should be spoken in criticism of one of the Judges of His Majesty.

The CHAIRMAN: I do not think that applies to deceased members of the Bench.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Subsequent investigation shows that injustice has been done to Judge Jeffreys, and he is now considered to have been exceedingly humane, broad-minded and courageous. I propose to address myself more particularly to the Amendment which is being nominally discussed, and I would draw attention to the speech of the hon. Member for South Bristol (Sir B. Rees), who made very light of the Amendment. He said it was only just turning round the procedure, that it was so slight a change he could not understand why I should object to it, and, at the same time, I understood, that if I refused to accept the Amendment, it would make all the difference to his voting for this Bill. But that is very inconsistent on his part, although it might not be quite so inconsistent as it appears, because the change proposed by this Amendment is one which would render the Bill practically unworkable. That is one of the reasons, no doubt, why it is pressed so much in some quarters. I have been referred to a resolution passed by the Parliamentary Committee of the Association of Poor Law Unions in England and Wales, and it is stated that the resolution is one in favour of the principle of this Amedment. Nobody has defined what the principle of the Amendment is. If I take the definition of the
hon. Member for South Bristol, the principle is merely turning round the procedure; while the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Benn) says that this is merely a method of allowing the House of Commons to debate an Order.
There are two points in the Amendment to which I should like to draw attention. The first is one which, perhaps, the hon. Member had in mind when he said the resolution of the Poor Law Unions was in favour of the principle of the Amendment. Under the Amendment an Order is not to come into operation unless and until it has been approved by a Resolution passed in each House. That is to say it is not to become operative until an affirmative Resolution has been passed. Under the Bill, of course, the Order becomes operative as soon as it is made, and although it is true the House, if it chooses, can rescind the. Order for extending the time, nevertheless that is without prejudice to anything which may have been done under the Order as long as it had been in force. It is a very big change to say that the Order shall not come into force until actually approved by each House. Suppose, for example, there has been an Order, and it is proposed to extend it. The extension cannot come into operation untilit has been approved by Parliament. There is going to be a gap. [HON. MEMBEERS: "No!"] What is going to happen? There will be no provision for anything to happen in the way of giving relief after the expiration of the first period. There is another contingency which, apparently, no hon. Member has foreseen. This House does not sit continuously all the year round.

Mr. GROVES: It is a pity.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I doubt very much, if a serious proposal were made for the House to sit all the year round, that the bon. Member would support it.

Mr. GROVES: Yes.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: At any rate, we have to deal with the facts as we find them. We art; not sitting all she year round, and supposing the emergency for an Order arises when the House is not sitting, it would be impossible to do anything, and you might get a complete stoppage.

Mr. LANSBURY: That happened last year.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes. Of course, the hon. Member wants to make this impossible. I understand his point of view. The hon. Member, who professes that he wishes to support the Bill, must see that by supporting an Amendment of this kind, he is doing exactly the opposite from what he desires to do, as this would tender the working of the Bill impossible. There is another point. After all, the method in the Bill is the common form. It is the usual procedure for the approval of Orders made. The procedure in the Amendment, however, suggests that
unless and until it has been approved either with or without modification by a Resolution passed by each House of Parliament.
I do not know whether the Committee remembers, but I recall an occasion when one House of Parliament, in trying to follow out this procedure, modified a Resolution in the opposite direction, and it was found upon that occasion that procedure in this form was not workable. I do not think, so far as I remember, that since that particular occasion, when this absurd deadlock took place—because there was not unanimity between the two Houses—we have ever adopted this procedure again.

Captain BENN: Exactly the same Clause is to be found in the German Reparation (Recovery) Act, which was put in by the Government in 1921.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am referring to a inter occasion, while I myself was in office. Of course, I was not in office in 1921. This is a more recent occasion than that. What I submit to the Committee is, that really they are not going to get such a difference by an operation of this kind as sonic Members think. Hon. Members are not coming down to the House at great inconvenience to thems[...]ves, after 11 o'clock, in order to debate an Order when there is no necessity for it. Hon. Members are not coming down here even to be entertained by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Leith with one of his sprightly speches. There will be no difference whatever made to the discussion that will be allowed under the Bill.

Mr. GREENWOOD: Except that the right hon. Gentleman will have taken his powers.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: That may be.

Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOOD: And there is a great deal of difference between debate taking place after you have taken your decision, and debate, when the decision depends upon he good will of the House.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: That may be, but the hon. Gentleman is now taking another point. I was answering the statement of the hon. Member opposite on a different point, when he said I was afraid of debate. I say that the Amendment here is not one that will make the slightest difference in the amount of debate which may take place under the Bill. In consideration of the various points that I have put before the House as to the difficulty working the procedure proposed, I ask hon. Members to reject the Amendment.

Mr. MARDY JONES: This Bill, as I understand it, is a sort of prelude to the abolition of boards of guardians and the relegation of the fonetions of Poor Law relief to other local duthorities. Meantime, might I ask why has this Bill been brought in at all? The Bill has been brought in, we believe, to deal with the milling position—

The CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Gentleman will look it the Amendment, he will see that it; proposes that the Order shall not come into operation until after a Besolntion has been passed by each House of Parliament. He is getting away from that point.

Mr. JONES: I think it is very important that the House should not give the Minister this power to put the law into force when tile House is not sitting. The Bill is one to leave without check or control the policy order Minister, who by every possible means usurps the right of Parliament to protect the ratepayers and the taxpayers. It will be too late to endeavour to check him when the Order, rightly or wrongly, has been put into operation. It will be, I say, too late to put the matter right. I want to say frankly that, in my opinion, the Minister is simply carrying out the policy of the
Government in this business, and proposes to use this Bill, when it becomes law, as a threat over the heads of the Poor Law authorities throughout the country and particularly certain of them in the mining areas—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is out of order in pursuing that line of argument.

Mr. JONES: With all respect, Mr. Hoff, I am speaking the opinion of my OWN constituents in this matter. I am entitled to do so. The whole object and issue of the Bill is to "down the miners." [Interruption.] Yes it is.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is completely out of order.

Mr. TAYLOR: I desire, Mr. Hope, to put forward—

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: rose in his place, and claimed' to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question he now put,"

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

Mr. MARDY JONES: [seated and covered]. On a point of Order, Mr. Hope. The hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Taylor) was on his feet before you put the Question. He was raising a point of Order. Is it in order to aceept the Question when a Member is putting a point of Order?

The CHAIRMAN: I asked the hon. Member for Lincoln whether he was raising a point of Order, and he did not reply. He appeared to be about to makes a speech.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 152; Noes, 77.

Division No. 353.]
AYES.
[12.34 p.m.]


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Edwards,.J. Hugh (Accrington)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir lames T.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Monsell, Eyres, Cont. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Allen, J Sandeman (L pool, W. Derby)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R, (Ayr)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Morrison. H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Morrisom-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Atkinson, C.
Fleiden, E. B.
Murchison, C. K.


Balniei, Lord
Finburgh, S.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Nicholson, Col.Rt.Hn.W, G. Ptrsf'l d.)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Ganzoni, Sir John
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbed


Been, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. 
Pennelather, Sir John


Bennett, A. J.
George Abraham Grant, Sir J. A.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendlsh
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Promo)


Berry, sir George
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Ramsden, E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Remnant, Sir James


Blundell, F. N.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rhys, Hon, C. A. U.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brass, Captain W.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Savory, S. S.


Briscoe, Richard George
Hawke, John Anthony
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf[...]'d, Henley)
Shapperson, E. W.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Brown, Cal. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Skelton, A. N.


Brown, Brig.- G en. H.C. (Barks, Newby)
Hills, Major John Waller
Smithers, wa[...]dron


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Holland, Sir Arthur
Stanley, Co!. Hon. G. F. (Will[...]'sden, E.)


Campbell, E. T.
Holt, Capt. H. P.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
steel, Major Samuel Strang


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Lady wood)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Stuart. Hon. J. (moray and Nairn)


Christie, J. A.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sueter, Rear.Admiral Murray Fraser


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hutehison,G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bl[...]'s)
Sunder.Sir Wilfrid


Clayton, G. C.
I liffe., Sir Edward M.
Thomsen, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell'


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Jacob, A. E.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Cope, Major William
Kinclersley, Major G. M
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


cooper, J. B.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Warrnnder, Sir Victor


Crane, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Waterhouse. Captain Charles


Crooke, J. Smedley (DerBend)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainshro)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Wells, S. R.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Mr Lean, Major A.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Macquisten, F. A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Makins, Brigadier- General E.
Wilson. M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Dixey, A. C.
Malone, Major P. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lleut.-Colonel George


Eden, Captain Anthony
Maroesson, Captain D.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Wolmer,Viscount
Woodcock,ColonelH. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Woofersley, W. J.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
M r. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.
Bowyer.


NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hilisbro[...]')
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Ammon, Charles George
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Heath)
Stesser, Sir Henry H.


Attlee, Clement Richard
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Barr, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snell, Harry


Batey, Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Broad, F. A.
Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Lee, F.
Taylor, R. A.


Charteton, H. C.
Lunn William
Thurtle, E.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J. R.(Aberavon)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cove, W. G.
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan. Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dalton, Hugh
MacLaren, Andrew
Varley, Frank B.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Montague, Frederick
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Gosling, Harry
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coine)
Palin, John Henry
Westwood. J.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Paling, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Hail, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Purcell, A. A.
Williams. J. (York, Don Valley)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Windsor, Wailer


Hardie, George D.
Saklatvaia, Shapurli
Wright, W.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon, Vernon
Scryrngeour, E.



Hayes,John Henry
Scurr, John
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sexton, James
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
A. Barnes.

Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The, Committee divided: Ayes, 159; words proposed Noes, 80.

Miss LAWRENCE>: ; I beg to move, in page 2, line 26, to leave out Sub section (4).
In view of the unanimous desire of those representatives of the districts affected to speak in this Debate, I only propose to occupy the time of the Committee a few moments. This is the Sub-section which provides for the payment to the appointed guardians of such remuneration and travelling expenses as the Minister may approve. In my opinion, if civil servants are sent down to these districts it is very unfair that the ratepayers in those very poor areas should have to bear all this expense, because the Minister of Health has power to send as many officials as he likes, and that is the reason why I move to leave out Sub-section (4) of this Clause which confers these exceptional powers.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): Obviously it is necessary to have a provision of this kind in the Bill in order that we shall be able to
appoint people who will act on behalf of the guardians and who will administer affairs with a due regard to the position prevailing at the present moment. Under these circumstances it will be necessary to pay them. I think hon. Members will agree that it is very necessary to have an Advisory Committee in a case of this kind constituted of people who have, had experience in Poor Law administration, so that in this very difficult piece of work the appointed guardians will have the advice and the assistance of those who have had a long experience in Poor Law administration. Therefore, I think it is only right that provision should be made for their remuneration and a payment of their expenses. With regard to what has been said on this point, my view is that, instead of the district suffering financial loss as a result of the introduction of the substituted boards of guardians and the Advisory Committee, I believe that, without inflicting any hardship on a single deserving person, in a very short time there will be an improved state of
affairs both financially and in many other respects. The hon. Lady who moved this Amendment was very anxious about the cost to the ratepayers, but I think she will find there will be a very considerable saving without doing any harm to a single individual.

Captain BENN:: On a point of Order, Mr. Chairman. I wish to point out to you that there is a very ancient rule in this House that no Bill may be passed which lays a charge on the subject unless it has been preceded by a Money Resolution. This Sub-section undoubtedly lays a charge on the subject because the Minister of Health can appoint officers who may he paid out of moneys provided by the subject through the local rates. I do not know that anything of this kind has even been proposed before, and as this Sub-section clearly levies a charge on the subject I do not think it ought to be passed until a Money Resolution has been adopted.

The C I R MAN: That -Rule applies to moneys provided by Parliament and Bills which involve an increase of the rates are admissible. Even hon. Members can move, during the Committee stage, Amendments involving a charge on the rates.

Captain BENN: May I point out, Mr. Chairman, that in the ease of the Bills which impose a charge upon the rates it is always provided that the local authority shall have power to do certain things at the expense of the rates. This is a totally new principle. It is giving the Minister power to levy a charge upon the people by means of local rates, and I submit that, inasmuch as this is the first example of the kind, some ruling from the Chair should be, given.

The CHARMAN: I am quite clear that this is not one of the precedents which requires a Money Resolution to be passed, and I may remark that Sub-section (4) provides that the remuneration and expenses may be paid out of moneys in the hands of the appointed guardians. So it is to be assumed that it is there.

Sir HENRY SLESSER: I have a material and pertinent question to put to the hon. Gentleman. I want to know whether, in the opinion of the hon. Member, these appointed guardians will have
their accounts and payments to themselves audited by the Local Government auditor, and, if so, whether they will be liable to surcharge if they improperly remunerate themselves or pay excessive moneys out in any way.

Sir K. WOOD: As I understand it, these appointed guardians will occupy exactly the same place, and have exactly the same status, as if they had been elected guardians, and they therefore, be subject to the same rules and regulations under the same law.

Mr. MARCH: I desire to support the deletion of this disgraceful Sub-section in a disgraceful Bill. Having heard the explanation of the Parliamentary Secretary with regard to the people who are to be nominated to go down and act on behalf of the guardians, it seems probable that they will have to give their whole time. As a matter of fact, at the present time some of the guardians, owing to the abnormal quantity of relief which has to be distributed, and the abnormal number who apply for relief, are giving four days of their time and getting no pay whatever. When West Ham a little time ago asked the Ministry of Health whether they could see their way clear to allow tile guardians to have travelling expenses as they had a very big area to cover, the Ministry said, "Oh no, we cannot grant any travelling expenses." But the hon. Gentleman says that the people whom the Ministry are going to nominate will, of course, he entitled to travelling expenses. They could not expect them to go down anti administer relief without they had their travellingexpenses and subsistence allowance. There is no subsistence allowance for the present guardians. They dare not have a cup of tea on the premises without they pay for it. But here the Minister is upsetting all that and bringing in administrators of his own, and, when it comes to their remuneration, either they are to be their own judges or else the Minister is going to fix it.
We are told that there is a possibility that the rates will be reduced and not increased by this administration without any of the genuine cases not getting their proper quantity of relief. That depends who is going to be the judge what the
amount of relief is to be. These people who are to be nominated by the Ministry are to have special instructions to cut down relief, and out of the amount that, they are able to cut off the poor people they are to pay themselves a decent salary and provide themselves with subsistence allowance. It is not a laughing matter, and 1 am quite certain, if you send them to Poplar, we shall not consider it a laughing matter. Our people are not going to be dished off quite so simply and easily as you may think. They wil1 want the proper amount of assistance and relief. You cannot show that thers hoer any exorbitant amount of relief given in West Ham or Poplar or any of these other places where you are contemplating taking over the administration and, if this Sub-section goes through. the people generally will resent and resist it and do all they possibly can to see that it does not do what you say that it is going to do, namely, relieve the rates.

1.0 p. m.

Mr. GROVES: I want to support the Amendment, because I think it is very ironical on the part of the Government that, having turned down a private Member's Bill for the payment of members of local authorities, they should propose to pay their own people whom they are going to send down to West Ham. I am believer in the payment of members of local authorities, and am amazed that there should have been so much condemnation of members of boards of guardians who have been engaged, assiduously engaged, nearly the whole of their time on this work. I am interested to know whether these payments are to come out of the local rates. If so, are the people who are going to authorise the payment of these new guardians to be surcharged, because the Minister of Health is going to assist? He is going to authorise these payments out of local rates contributed by people who object to the arrival of these people. This House will be surprised to know that the district auditor refused members of the West Ham Board of Guardians, who used to spend six or seven hours a day on the premises, an ordinary luncheon, which would not have cost more than 1s. each, and surcharged them. That being so, I think it is very wrong to say that your highly-paid civil servants who are going down to West Ham to administer this new Act should be paid out of the local rates.
If they are to be paid at all, they should be paid out of the national Exchequer. I submit that that is the reasonable view.

Mr. TAYLOR: Might I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health if any rate of subsistence allowance has been laid down for those who are going to discharge the duties of guardians under this Bill?

Sir K. WOOD: I understand that the hen. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lanshury) proposes to move the rejection of the Bill on Third Beading, and, obviously, we cannot fix the rate of remuneration until the Bill becomes law.

Mr. KELLY: I think that what we have just heard will justify the carrying of this Amendment. We are being asked in this Bill to give the Minister the opportunity of deciding upon the remuneration and the amount of subsistence allowance that he will grant to those whom he is sending to do the work for which other people were elected; and yet we find the Ministry of Health so anxious that nothing shall be spent by boards of guardians that they even go to the extent of spending more on legal expenses to recover 2d. than any amount which has been spent by a board of guardians. They are opposed to any expenditure at all by those engaged in the administration of Poor Law relief, and yet, when they call upon their friends in order to try and reduce the amount, to try and administer badly the Poor Law relief in this country, they are quite prepared to pay them, not only in West Ham, but in those other districts on which the Ministry of Health has its eye in the determination to displace boards of guardians and put in other people. I Lope that, this newly found love for displacing voluntary service, this idea On the part of the Ministry of health that it is better to pay people for engaging upon the work of guardians, will he carried into operation on a better occasion and for a better work than is the case at the present time. I hope the Committee will not give tile Minister this power, but will support this Amendment, and will refuse to allow these people to be paid the remuneration and subsistence allowance asked for in this Bill.

Mr. TINKER: I support this Amendment. On the previous Amendment, which sought to provide that before the Minister received these powers the sanction of Parliament should be given, we were defeated, and now the Minister is asking for power to make boards of guardians not only accept other officers to carry on their work, but pay them for it by a charge upon the rates. I claim that the Minister has no right to impose officers on a board of guardians and ask them to pay the expense of that. I consider that, if Parliament gives the Minister this power, Parliament at least ought to find the money to pay the people whom he sends down.

Mr. T. SHAW: I do not want to make a speech, but only to ask a question. Will the Parliamentary Eecretary tell the Committee whether it is the intention of the Department to pay these men salaries, if so, what salaries they are to have and how they are to be paid? Surely the Department know now what they intend to do, and I think the Committee should be told quite frankly.

Sir K. WOOD: I do not think the right hon. Gentleman can have been present when I spoke a little time ago. I will repeat what I said then, because I am always happy to give such information as I can. The intention is, as I stated a little while ago, so far as the substituted board of guardians is concerned, that they should be engaged in whole-time service, and they will be paid the necessary remuneration, which will be settled as soon as we can get them. I dare say the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate, when he has regard to the position of West Ham, that West Hain cannot. carry on for more than a few days without financial assistance by way of loan, which my right hon. Friend will have to sanction, and the substituted board will be in exactly the same position as the present board so far as finance is concerned. Therefore, when we lay down the conditions of the loan, the remuneration—because they will not be allowed, of course, to fix their own remuneration, or anything of that kind—must be fixed as one of the conditions when the new substituted board of guardians is appointed.

Mr. SHAW: I am apparently right in thinking that the West Ham Guardians will be substituted by a paid body who will receive salaries, but the Minister does not know how much they are going to get?

Sir K. WOOD: The remuneration of the substituted board of guardians will have to be fixed by my right hon. Friend. When the Bill is passed we shall take steps to invite various people to take up these duties, and, after due consultation with them, and by an ordinary businesslike apportionment, we shall arrive at what the value of their services will be.

Mr. SHAW: Is the hon. Gentleman's idea of what is business-like to ask us to buy a pig in a poke, without telling us anything about what he intends to do and how he intends to do it?

Mr. PALING: In view of the arrangement that has been made, I do not want to take up much time, but I should like the hon. Gentleman to explain what he meant when he was talking about the possibility of the new arrangement costing less to the taxpayers than the present arrangement. He seemed to indicate that the costs of administration were going to be less, but apparently he is going to send down a host of officials who are going to be paid in place of people who now do the whole thing voluntarily. Does he expect, by this new arrangement, to save anything on cost s of administration? It appears that at present there is no satisfactory arrangement as to what the salaries of these officials are going to be, or how many of them there are going to be. I think the Committee ought to have had some information as to what is likely to be the cost of administration under the new conditions which the Government are trying to impose, and also as to the present cost. If they are riot going to save on the cost of administration, how is there going to be any saving? Is the whole object of the Bill to save money at the expense of the people who are receiving relief at present? I am rather interested in this, not only from the point of view of West Ham, but from the point of view of the miners in mining districts. There is a disposition in mining districts to send Labour representatives to serve on boards of guardians, and apparently we become suspect also in this matter. Is this another subtle attempt, either in this
stoppage or in some other stoppage which may occur, to deprive the miners of the sustenance which they are getting at present?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): That is a speech against the whole Bill.

Mr. PALING: I will leave that, in the circumstances, but I would Iike to ask if the Parliamentary Secretary can give us any information as to whether, if the administration costs of any board of guardians anywhere in the country are of such a character as to warrant his sending down paid officials, the cost in that case is likely to be less than under the present administration?

Mr. WALLHEAD: The Parliamentary Secretary let fall some very illuminating remarks. He had been asked what remuneration is going to be paid to the substituted boards of guardians, and he said he could not tell because they did not know whom they would be able to get it appears likely, therefore, that the Ministry will appoint persons for this job who will receive varying amounts of remuneration. I suppose that if they can only get a few Generals their remuneration will be pretty high. If, on the other hand, he is driven to get a railway guard, the remuneration will be based on a railway guard's wages. It is a very good principle to import into local government. Hon. Members opposite have had a good deal to say about the dictatorship of Moscow. I hope to God we shall hear no more about dictatorship! This is the worst form of dictatorship that exists outside Italy. There is nothing like it outside the dictatorship of the Fascist party of Italy, where local authorities are appointed at the whim and will of the powers that be. The Conservative Government here, I suppose with the Carlton Club behind them—

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I must remind the hon. Member that this Subsection deals with remuneration.

Mr. WALLHEAD: I suppose members of the Carlton Club may be appointed to the job, and I want to know what remuneration is going to be paid—whether it is £200 a year or £20 a week. Evidently it will depend entirely upon the type of person who will be obtained, and
I suppose their social standing. We have a right to press very definitely for what is in the mind of the Government in regard to remuneration. Is it going to he based upon the value of the service or the assumed social value of the person to be appointed?It is positively scandalous. The hon. Gentleman has given the whole show away. This is, I suppose, a business for finding jobs of a somewhat temporary kind for younger sons. There may be an extension of the principle, and the opening of a whole lot of semi-Government jobs to pensioners, younger sons, ex-Tory agents and persons of that description. We have a right to be suspicious of the proposals that are being made by the Minister. I hope if there is any sense of honour left, any sense of amour-propre whatever, any idea as to common decency, we, shall protest against this outrageous infliction on local areas of the proposals of the Minister.

Major CRAWFURD: I think hon. Members above the Gangway must accept this. If the Bill is to become law, and if the hon. Gentleman and his right hon. colleague cannot get people to work it for them voluntarily, they will have to pay someone to do it. The hon. Member who has just spoken left out one little detail. As far as I understood the hon. Gentleman, the position is that the salary is not known, and it will not be known until he has consulted with the people who are to receive it. I do not know if any significance is to he attached to that or not. In passing legislation of this sort, which obviously was unknown before, the Government is creating a precedent to meet an exceptional situation, and even if we admit that the inhabitants of West Ham, or any of the neighbouring districts, are to be divided into goats and sheep, it is necessary to try to make your legislation commendable to the sheep, even if you cannot make it commendable to the goats, and they ought to consider the effect on public opinion in these- districts of the particular form in which they are passing the Bill. 1 am not so much concerned with how much is paid to these people. That, after all, is a detail which concerns them more than me. But I am concerned about this. Here is the Government under exceptional circumstances altering the form of local government in a particular
locality, and one of the alterations is that whereas before the people in that locality got voluntary service, under the Government plan they are to he compelled to pay for the service that is imposed upon them and I do not think that is really going to commend this system to the mass of the people in these localities. This is Government action taken, I presume, not so much with regard to West Ham as with regard to the interest of the country as a whole. Since that is the view, the country as a whole should pay for these services. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman expresses facially some surprise at the argument I am advancing. I commend to him this line of argument, that he has got to try to make this legislation acceptable in the districts where it is going to operate.

Mr. TAYLOR: I wish to put one point which is of some importance. Will the salaries and remuneration it is proposed to pay to those who take the place of the present guardians he subjected to the same, power of scrutiny by the auditor as the expenses incurred by existing boards of guardians, and if not, why not?

Sir K. WOOD: They will receive, of course, no other payment than what is fixed by the Minister.

Mr. TAYLOR: At present, as I understand it, the power of the auditors is restricted to taking exception to improper and illegal expenditure and, as I understand the hon. Gentleman's reply, in this case the Minister of Health is to fix the salaries and expenses and the auditor will have no power to question the legality or the propriety of those salaries and expenses because they have been fixed by the Minister. Had they been fixed by the board of guardians the auditor would be entitled to say a certain salary was excessive having regard to the duties, or a certain rate of expenses was excessive having regard to the needs of the people.

Sir K. WOOD: In the ordinary way hoards of guardians are not paid for their services. When this new board is appointed the duty of the auditors will be to see that the guardians are in receipt of no more than the amount which is fixed by the Minister under the authority of this Clause. It undoubtedly gives
authority to the Minister to fix the amount of remuneration.

Mr. TAYLOR: Do I understand that a subsistence allowance, with expensive lunches and so on, may be ordered, and that the auditor will have no power to surcharge anyone for this unnecessary expense They are to be dumped upon the ratepayers, who will have to pay, whether they like it or not, salaries over which the auditor has no control.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: The Parliamentary Secretary has shown quite clearly that, under the new arrangement, the auditor will only be able to deal with the simple point, whether the amount paid in salary is exactly what the Minister has agreed upon. That is not a handling of the situation as it operates at present. It is a complete infringement upon the law as it stands to-day and a gross injustice on all concerned with public administration. This Sub-section raises the main question that in reality the whole of the administration of Poor relief is one of national expenditure. The Government are now altering the system whereby the people who now give voluntary service are to be superseded, and the Minister is admitting that he cannot get people to.do this kind of work voluntarily. He is to select the men and settle the salaries to be paid. Under such conditions, the main question as to the sufferings of the poor is not to be dealt with as a whole by national expenditure. Under this Bill the Government is to operate upon the basis of class legislation and to establish a system which is contrary to all the best principles of local government.

Mr. PALING: Has any estimate been formed as to the possible cost of administration under the new system as against the system operating at the present time?

Sir K. WOOD: No.

Mr. PALING: Why not?

Several hon. Members having risen—

Sir K. WOOD: rose in his place, and claimed to move, [...]"That the Question be now put."

Question put, "That the Question be now put."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 159; Noes, 80.

Division No. 354.]
AYES.
[12.42 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hurst, Gerald B.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)
Hutchison,G.A.Clark (Mifflin & Piblis)


Allen. J. Sanderman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Curzon, Captain Viscount
[...]lite. Sir Edward M.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K,
Dalkeith, Earl of
Jacob, A. E.


Ashley, L1.-Col. Rt. Han.W
Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Atkinson, C.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Balniel, Lord
Dawson, Sir Philip
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M,
Dixey, A, C.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Eden, Captain Anthony
Knox, Sir Alfred


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Conlifte. Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Bennett, A. J
Edwards. J. Hugh (Accrington)
Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere


Bentirick, Lord Henry Cavendish
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Berry. Sir George
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Westoms.-M.)
McLean, Major A.


Betterton, Henry B.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.,)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Macguisten, F. A.


Blundell. F. N.
Falts, Sir Charles F.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Fielden, E. B.
Makins, Crigadier-General E.


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Finburgh, S.
Malone, Major P. B.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Frece,Sir Walter de
Maresson. Captain D.


Brass, Captain W.
Ganzeni. Sir John
Marriott. Sir J. A. R.


Briscoe, Richard George
Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Brittaln, Sir Harry
Goff, Sir Park
Monseil, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Moore. Licut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Grattan Doyle, Sir N.
Morrison H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Morrison.Rell, Sir Arthur Clive


Brown, Brig.-G en. H.C. (Berks. Newby)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Murchison, C. K.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cadonan, Major Hon. Edward
 Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nicholson. Col. Rt. Hn.W.G.(Ptrsr[...]'ld.)


Campbell, B. T.
Gunsion, Captain D. W.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hall,Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
Penneinther. Sir John


Chamberlain, At. He. Sir. I. A. (Birm.,W.)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Christie, J. A.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent).
Pete, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Churchill. Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hawke, John Anthony
Ramsden, E.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Henderson, Lleut.-Col. V. L, (Bootle)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Clayton, G. C.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G
Remnant, Sir James


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hills, Major John Waller
Rentoirl, G. S.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Conway. Sir W. Marlin
Holland, Sir Arthur
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cope, Major William
Holt, Captain H. P.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cooper, J. B.
Howard. Captain Hon. Donald
Savery, S. S.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hume, Sir G. H.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Shepperson, E. W.
Tryon, Rt. Hon George Clement
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Winterton-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Skelton, A. N.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull )
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Slaney, Majar P. Kenyon
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Smithers, Waldron
Warrender, Sir Victor
Wolmer, Viscount


Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Womersiey, W. J


Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F.(Will'sden,E.)
Watson. RI. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Stanley. Lord (Fylde)
Wells, S. R.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)



Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES —


Thomson. Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain




Bowyer.


NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hilisbro[...]')
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Ammon, Charles George
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Attlee, Clement Richard
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighiey)


Barnes,A.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snell, Harry


Barr, J.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Batey, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford. T. W.


Bend, Captain Wedgwood (Lelth)
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
 Lansbury, George
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Broad. F A.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lee, F.
Taylor, R. A.


Cape, Thomas
Lunn, William
Thurtle, E


Charleton. H. C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J. R.(Aneravon)
Tinker, John Joseph


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Cove, W. G.
MacLaren, Andrew
Varley, Frank B.


Dalton, Hugh
March, S.
Viant, S. P.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Montague, Frederick
Wallhead, Richard C


Day, Colonel Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen.


Edwards. C. (Monmouth, Bedwelity)
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gosling. Harry
Palin, John Henry
Westwood, J.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C


Grenfell. D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llaneily)


Griffiths. T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Purcell, A. A.
Williams. T. (York. Don Valley)


Groves, T.
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Windsor, Walter


Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Wright, W.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Scrymgeour. E.



Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hartshorn. Rt. Hon. Vernon
Sexton, James
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Hayes.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)

Division No. 355.]
AYES.
[1.29 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Murchison, C. K.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fielden, E. B.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Finburgh, S.
Nicholson,Col. Rt. Hon. W. G. (Ptrsf[...]'ld.)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Atkinson, C.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Bainiel, Lord
Ganzoni, Sir John
Pennefather, Sir John


Ba[...]lay-Harvey, C. M.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Bennett, A. J.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Ramsden, E.


Berry, Sir George
Grotrian, H. Brent
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gulnness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Remnant, Sir James


Blundell, F. N.
Hall, Lieut.-Cal. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hall,Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
Russell. Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Savery, S. S.


Briscoe, Richard George
Hawke, John Anthony
Shepperson, E. W.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Brocklebank, C. E, R.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Hills, Major John Waller
Skelton, A. N.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Smithers, Waldron


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Holland, Sir Arthur
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will[...]'sden, E.)


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Holt, Captain H. P.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Howard Captain Hon. Donald
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hume, Sir G. H.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Campbell, E. T.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hurd, Percy A,
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Chamberlain, Rt: Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Christie, J. A.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl[...]'n & P'bl[...]'s)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
IIifte, Sir Edward M.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Clayton, G. C.
Jacob, A. E.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kinesten-en-Hult,


Cobb, Sir Cyril
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
[...]Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Cookerill, Brig-General Sir G. K.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Knox, Sir Alfred
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Cope, Major William
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Wells, S. R.


Cooper, J. B.
Lister, Cunllffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Locker- Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw[...]'th)
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dalrymple


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I of W.)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Macintyre, I.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
McLean, Major A.
Windsor-Clive. Lieut.-Colonel George


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Maequlsten, F. A.
Winterion, Rt. Hon, Earl


Davidson, J. (Hertfl'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wolmer, Viscount


Dawson, Sir Philip
Margesson, Captain D.
Womersley, W J.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Monsell, Eyres, Conn. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. R. C. (Ayr)
Yerbursh, Major Robert D. T.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Morden, Col. W. Grant



Everard, W. Lindsay
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbll[...]y)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Major Sir Harry Barnston and Mr. F. C. Thomson.

NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hilisbro[...]')
Groves, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hall, G.H.(Merthyr Tyavil)
Oliver, George Harold


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hardle, George D
Palin, John Henry


Barnes, A.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Paling, W.


Barr, J.
Heyday, Arthur
Potts, John S.


Batey, Joseph
Hayes, John Henry
Purcell. A. A.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst W. (Bradford South)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hudson, I. H. (Huddersfield)
Scrymgeour, E.


Broad, F. A.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
ScUrr, John


Bromley, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sexton, James


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Cape, Thomas
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Shepherd. Arthur Lewis


Charleton, H. C.
Kelly, W. T.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Cove, W. G.
Kennedy, T.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Crawfurd. H. E.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Snell, Harry


Dalton, Hugh
Lansbery, George
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawrence, Susan
Stamford, T. W.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lee, F.
Stephen, Campbell


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Gardner, J. P.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Aberavon)
Taylor, R. A.


Gosling, Harry
Mackinder, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
MacLaren, Andrew
Thurtle, E.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
March, S.
Tinker, John Joseph


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Montague, Frederick
Varley, Frank B.

Viant, S. P.
Westwood, J.
Windsor, Walter


Wellhead, Richard C.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.



Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Charles Edwards.

Question put accordingly, "That the words proposed to he left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 165; Noes, 82.

Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Palln, John Henry
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Paling, W.
Thurtle, E.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Potts, John S.
Tinker, John Joseph


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Purcell, A. A
Varley, Frank B.


Kelly, W. T.
Saklatvala, Shapurjl
Viant, S. P.


Kennedy, T.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Scurr, John
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Lansbury, George
Sexton, James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Lawrence, Susan
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Westwood, J.


Lee, F.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lowth, T.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanally)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Kelghley)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mackinder, W.
Snell, Harry
Windsor, Walter


MacLaren, Andrew
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip



March, S.
Stamford, T, W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Montague, Frederick
Stephen, Campbell
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. T.


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Henderson.


Oliver, George Harold
Taylor, R. A.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill?"

Mr. GROVES: I want to make a short personal explanation of a statement I made yesterday, and I will be brief, bright and brotherly. This Bill has been brought forward by the Minister of Health because of the bankrupt position of the West Ham Union. In his speech the right hon. Gentleman did not make so violent and flagrant attack on the West Ham Guardians as some local people. The right hon. Gentleman has been very temperate in his use of the information that has been pumped into him. According to our political opponents, the people who are on the R.O. in West Ham—the R.O. is the Relief Office—have not only been living on Devonshire cream and cider, but have been doing very well generally in living extravagantly. In the "Evening News" and other ordinary journals one can see such statements about the people. When I spoke yesterday I had no idea that my evidence was so near. There are just four points with which I wish to deal now. I have here an extract from the report of the Auditor appointed by the Minister of Health for the past year. It will be remembered that when the Minister was dealing with the case against West Ham, he said that there were 100 cases of people who got relief and had no right to it—people who got relief by false pretences. I said there were few such cases. This extract from the report of the Auditor gives names and addresses and the precise numbers of the people, under the heading "List of cases in which relief would not appear to be necessary when the whole of the circumstances of the household were taken into consideration." The report is for the
year ended 31st March, 1925. It is no fault of mine if the report for the year just ended is not yet published. In this list there are 43 cases mentioned. Yet there are 30,000 people receiving relief in West Ham. Because there are 43 such cases we are presented with a Bill to supersede the West Ham Guardians. I want to read from the report the following:
The Guardians have a regulation, as regards permanent cases, that relief should not be granted where the united income of a family is sufficient for the support of its members, whether such relatives are liable in law to support the applicant or not.
That statement is publicly printed by the auditor in his report. The West Ham Guardians have adopted that rule, although they are not compelled by law to do so. A second extract from the report is as follows:
Old Age Pensions are being augmented to bring them up to the full scale of 15s. for a single person and 25s. for a married couple, and in the majority of cases there is no attempt to record the circumstances of sons who might be able to pay something.
That is a point in the contrary direction. We have arrived at an awful state in this country when old age pensioners of 70 years of age and more, who have got just the 10s. per week, have to go to the guardians for an extra 5s. because they cannot live on the 10s. The sons of pensioners in West Ham, like the sons of pensioners throughout the country, are willing and anxious to help their parents, but in West Ham most of them have wives and families of their own, and with wages that are approximately only £2 a week how can they keep their parents?

Mr. WALLHEAD: How many sons of the aristocracy keep their parents?

Mr. GROVES: My third quotation is an admission of the part of the auditor in favour of the West Ham Guardians. It says:
Efforts have been made to detect trafficking in relief tickets, but so far have been usually without result "—
Why did the District Auditor make these efforts? Because the Ministry of Health had received anonymous letters and statements had been made in the newspapers that people in West Ham were getting food tickets and selling them at a discount. Of course, the Ministry put their man on the job, and here is the result. The quotation goes on:
as apparently the sight of a stranger stops any transaction.
That is nasty and unwarranted. I live in West Ham. There are people in our Poor Law union who are willing to do the worst thing that you can conceive. There are black sheep in every class. They are willing to live for ever on the relief office. But they are few, and their existence is no reason for condemning the bulk of good citizens. I submit that on this report of the Auditor there is no justification whatever for the introduction of this Bill. I am sorry the Minister of Health is not here. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to hear my reply, and I wanted to be more gracious to him than he was to me. When I suggested that the House of Commons should sit more frequently, I understood him to say that, if it did, I would not be here. Well, I have been a Member of this House for four years, and I have not had a day off yet. I look upon this as my job. I am here as a workman, and I feel that any man who is elected to the House of Commons ought to attend to his duties. I may not be a successful craftsman, but we must all make the best attempt we can. Yesterday I made a statement to the effect that in West Ham I had seen strangers conducting investigations, and I am afraid I conveyed the impression that I was suggesting that the Minister of Health and his assistant had deliberately sent those people surreptitiously. I never used those words. I have carefully read my speech, and I did not say that, but I did say that people were there whom I did not think ought to be there without the knowledge of the Minister. I am sure you know they were there. Before the Minister can put this Bill into operation it will be necessary, as is the
case with generals in warfare, to have a preliminary skirmish, and in order to have that skirmish it is necessary to have people who have been conducting investigations for the past year. The Ministry are wise in sending the same group of people, but let me point what has actually taken place according to this Report. In the matter of investigation there has been a change of policy. In the past these investigators used to come in a courteous and friendly way, meeting the officers and interrogating them, and cross-examining them. But a change is now being made, and the new people who went down there took their seats at the table and investigated the cases of the different applicants and also the work of the relieving officer, who is a statutory official. The Report states:
It is doubtful whether the investigators attached to each district can efficiently cope with the work of inspecting such a large number of cases. The reports of the [...]'Group Investigation' staff, which makes surprise examinations in the districts, show that several omissions occur as regards number of children, earnings, pension, amount of benefit, rent and other particulars. I understand the local investigator can, usually, only find time for inquiry into new applications.… The Group Investigation staff is undoubtedly a very valuable check and deterrent, more especially as the Accountancy branch of the Clerks' Department, working under heavy pressure, do not exercise any check upon the orders for relief. Originally the Group Investigation staff undertook only the examination of unemployment cases.
These are not permanent cases, but people drawing relief from the West Ham Union who are on relief because they have no work to do. That is a national problem. But, says the report,
after a fraud in the [...]'permanent' cases"—
I ask hon. Members to note that—"a fraud—
and later, cases of manipulation of tickets for discretionary relief, the staff has been increased … I have arranged for a complete test of six districts within the next few weeks.
I am sure the Minister will exonerate me from any deliberate intention of saying that he was endeavouring to do wrong too early. I feel that the increase of the staff, the sending of these people to West Ham at the psychological moment, was a mistake, and that by it there was created in West Ham an impression which will be inimical to that social and friendly working that you must have, even if your
Bill is going to be successful, in order to give relief to our poor people in that borough and prevent social disorder. We do not want social disorder. We speak against this Bill because we feel that a very weak case has been presented for it. I oppose Clause 1 standing part

Division No. 357.]
AYES.
[2.3 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut..Colonel
Finburgh, S.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Pennefather, Sir John


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Anglin, Colonel R. V. K.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Ashley, Lt.-Col, Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Ganzonl, Sir John
Phillpson, Mabel


Atkinson, C.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Pliditch, Sir Philip


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Asshetan


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Ramsden, E.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Grotrlan, H. Brent
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bennett, A. J.
Guinness, Fit. Hon. Walter E.
Remer, J. R.


Berry, Sir George
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Remnant, Sir James


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Hail, Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Blundell, F. N.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rye, F. G.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hawke, John Anthony
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Savery, S. S.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hills, Major John Waller
Shepperson, E. W.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. J.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sinclair, Col.T. (Queen's Univ.,Belfst)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Holland, Sir Arthur
Skelton, A. N.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y
Holt, Captain H. P.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Smithers, Waldron


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Hume, Sir G. H.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hurd, Percy A.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Campbell, E. T.
Hutchison. G. A. Clark (Midl[...]'n & P[...]'bl's)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.Sir.J.A.(Birm.,W.)
Jacob, A. E.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Christle, J. A.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Clayton, G. C.
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Ward, Lt-Col.A.L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Warrender, Sir Victor


Cockerill, Brigadler-General G. K.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw[...]'th)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Cope, Major William
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Wells, S. R.


Cooper, J. B.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Macintyre, Ian
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dalrymple


Craig, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
McLean, Major A.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)
Macqulsten, F. A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Davicison, J. (Hertrd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Margesson, Captain D.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Meller, R. J.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Dawson, Sir Philip
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wolmer, Viscount


Eden, Captain Anthony
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Womersley, W. J.


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s:M.)
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Morrison-Belt, Sir Arthur Clive
Yerhurgh, Major Robert D. T.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)



Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fella, Sir Bertram G.
Nicholson, Col. Rt.Hn.W.G.(Ptrsf[...]'ld.)
M r. F. C. Thomson and Lord


Falls, Sir Charles F.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Stanley.


Fielden, E. B.
Dman, Sir Charles William C.





NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield. Hillshro')
Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Gardner, J. P.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cape, Thomas
Gosling, Harry


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Charleton, H. C.
Graham, Rt. Han. Wm. (Edln.,Cent.)


Barnes, A.
Cove, W. G.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coins)


Barr, J.
Crawfurd, H. E.
Grentell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Belay, Joseph
Dalton, Hugh
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Groves, T.


Bowerman. Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Day, Colonel Harry
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)


Broad, F. A.
Dennison, R.
Hardie, George D.


Bromley, J.
Dunnlco, H.
Heyday, Arthur

of it, and I hope the Committee will forgive me for my intrusion.

Question put, [...]"That the Clause stand part of the Bill.[...]'

The Committee divided: Ayes, 166; Noes, 81.

Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Morrison. R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Paths, John Henry
Taylor, R. A.


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Paling, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Potts, John S.
Thurtle, E.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Purcell, A. A.
Tinker, John Joseph


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Saklatvala, Shapurjl
Varley, Frank B.


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Scrymgeour, E.
Vlant, S. P.


Kelly, W. T.
Scurr, John
Wallhead, Richard C.


Kennedy, T.
Sexton, James
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Webb. Rt. Hon. Sidney


Lansbury, George
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Westwood, J.


Lawrence, Susan
Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C


Lee, F.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Maclainder, W.
Snell, Harry
Windsor, Walter


MacLaren, Andrew
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip



March, S.
Stamford, T. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Montague, Frederick
Stephen, Campbell
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.

CLAUSE 2.—(Short title and application.)

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Division No. 358.]
AYES.
[2.10 p.m


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Fielden, E. B.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool,W. Derby)
Finburgh, S.
Pennefather, Sir John


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Percy, Lord Euslace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Atkinson, C.
Frece. Sir Walter de
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Ballour, George (Hampstead)
Garzoni, Sir John
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Asshetan


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Ramuden, E.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Grant, J. A.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Bennett, A. J.
Gretton, Colonel John
Ramer, J. R.


Berry, Sir George
Grotrian, H. Brent
Remnant, Sir James


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Blundell, F. N.
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Rye, F. G.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bowater, Sir T. Vanslttart
Hawke, John Anthony
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Savery, S. S.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hills, Major John Walter
Shepperson, E. W.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Matylebone)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sinclair, Col. T,(Queen's Univ.,Beilast)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb[...]'y)
Holland, Sir Arthur
Skelton, A. N.


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Holt, Captain H. P.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Smithers, Waldron


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hume, Sir G. H.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F.(Will'sden, E.)


Campbell, E. T.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hurd, Percy A.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Christie, J. A.
Iliffle, Sir Edward M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Churchman, Sir Arthur C
Jacob, A. E.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Clayton, G. C.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
King, Capt. Henry Douglas
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Knox, Sir Allred
Ward, Lt-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on- Hull)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Cope, Major William
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Warrender, Sir Victor


Couper, J. B.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
MacIntyre, Ian
Wells, S. R.


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
McLean, Major A.
Wheier, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Macguisten, F. A.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, Cam. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Dalziel, Sir Davison
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Davidson, J.(H ertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Margesson, Captain D.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Meller, R. J.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Dawson, Sir Philip
Monsell, Eyres, Corn. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Eden, Captain Anthony
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wormer, Viscount


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Womersley, W. J.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Neville, R. J.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Nicholson, O. (Westml[...]ster)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Fairtax, Captain J. G.
Nicholson, Col. Rt.Hn.W.G.(Ptrsf[...]'ld.)



Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Major Hennessy and Lord

The Committee divided: Ayes, 157; Noes, 83.

NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Sexton, James


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Heyday, Arthur
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barr, J.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield).
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Bowerman, At. Hon. Charles W.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Snell, Harry


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bromley, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stamford, T. W.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Kelly, W. T.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Close, W. S.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cove, W. G.
Lansbury, George
Thurtle, E.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lawrence, Susan
Tinker, John Joseph


Dalton, H ugh
Lee, F.
Valley, Frank B.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lowth, T.
Vlant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Watlhead, Richard C.


Dennison, R.
Mackinder, W.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Donnico, H.
MacLaren, Andrew
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
March, S.
Westwood, J.


Gardner, J. P.
Montague, Frederick
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gosling, Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianeily)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edln,, Cent.)
Palin, John Henry
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.



Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Purcell, A. A.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Groves, T.
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Hayes.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Scrymgsour, E.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report the Bill, without Amendment, to the House."

Captain BENN: We are not entitled, of course, on this Motion to discuss the merits of the Bill, but we are entitled to comment on the procedure by which the Bill has been passed.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member is not entitled to discuss the procedure by which the Bill has been passed. It has nothing to do with the Motion before the House.

Captain BENN: But the Motion is, "That the Chairman do report the Bill, without Amendment, to the House," and

Division No. 359]
AYES.
[2.28 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Limit-Colonel
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Eden, Captain Anthony


Aeg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.


Albery, Irving James
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool,W. Derby)
Campbell, E. T.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Everard, W. Lindsay


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Atkinson, C.
Christie, J. A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Falls, Sir Charles F.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Clayton, G. C.
Finburgh, S.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Bennett, A. J.
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Frece, Sir Walter de


Berry, Sir George
Cope, Major William
Ganzoni, Sir John


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Sklpton)
Cowper, J. B.
Gates, Percy


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Blundell, F. N.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Grant, Sir J. A.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Daiziel, Sir Davison
Grotrian, H. Brent


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Davidson,J. (Hertf[...]'d, Hemel Hempst'd)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hall, Lieut.-col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Davison, Sir W. H (Kensington, S.)
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry

I submit that I am entitled on such a Motion to say that it is very rare a change of such constitutional importance should be made with such haste, and that the Third Reading should be rushed through after the Committee stage, there being no Report stage owing to the Government's attitude. It is a public constitutional question, and I think a protest is called for because of the indecent haste with which the Bill has been rushed through the House.

Question put, "That the Chairman do report the Bill, without Amendment, to the House."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 157; Noes, 80.

Hawke, John Anthony
Moore, Lieut.-Colenel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Smith, R.W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Smithers, Waldron


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Morrisorn-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Wilirsden, E.)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Neville, R. J.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'etand)


Holland, Sir Arthur
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Holt, Captain H. P.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sueter, Rear.Admiral Murray Fraser


Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hume, Sir G. H.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hurd, Percy A.
Pennefather, Sir John
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Hutchlson, G. A. Clark (Midl[...]'n & p[...]'bl's)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Illffe, Sir Edward M.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. LA Kingston-on-Hult)


Jacob, A, E.
Phillpson, Mabel
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Warrender, Sir Victor


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Ramstlen, E.
Wells, S. R.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Remer, J. R.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


MacIntyre, Ian
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


McLean, Major A.
Rye, F. G.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Macqulsten, F. A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wise, Sir Fredric


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wolmer, Viscount


Makine, Brigadier-General E.
Savery, S. S.
Womersley, W. J


Malone, Major P. B.
Shepperson, E. W.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Margesson, Captain D.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Meller, R. J.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Skelton, A. N.
45


Monsen, Eyres, Corn. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Major Hennessy and Lord Stanley.

NOES.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sexton, James


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Batey, Joseph
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan Neath)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Broad, F. A.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snell, Harry


Bromley, J.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Cape, Thomas
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Cherleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Cluse, W. S.
Lansbury, George
Taylor. R. A.


Cove, W. G.
Lawrence, Susan
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Crawford, H. E.
Lee, F.
Thurtle, E.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lowth, T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J. R. (Aberavon)
Varley, Frank B.


Dennison, R.
Mackinder, W.
Vlent, S. P.


Donnico, H.
MacLaren, Andrew
Wellhead, Richard C


Edwards. C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
March, S.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Gardner, J. P.
Montague, Frederick
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gosling, Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Westwood, J.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Coine)
Oliver, George Harold
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Palln, John Henry
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Purcell, A. A.



Hardie, George D.
Saklatvaia, Shapurji
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Scrymgeour, E.
Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Hayes.


Heyday, Arthur
Scurr, John

Bill reported, without Amendment.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

Mr. GREENWOOD: I beg to move, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day three months."
We have now reached the final stage of a, Bill which, apparently dealing with one area, strikes a blow at local government in this country. We were led, indeed, to believe on the Second
Reading of the Bill that West Ham was a seething mass of corruption, that large numbers of ratepayers had been driven to the Poor Law, that these people were those who, in fact, had put the present board of guardians into authority, and that therefore there was no other way of dealing with this problem than the simple one of superseding the Poor Law authority. Let me tell the House this: At this year's election of the board of guardians there were contests in four wards; in other wards there were no contests. In the parish of Wanstead there are 8,114
voters on the register: of these, 3,245 recorded their vote. In the parish of Woodford the electorate numbered 9,793: the number of electors at the election numbered 3,865. In another ward the electorate numbered 13,000: of these there voted 2,839. In a further ward the electors numbered nearly 16,000: there were 2,596 votes recorded. In view of these facts, what becomes of the theory that the board of guardians is being superseded because the board have been elected by an overwhelming mass of people who themselves are in receipt of relief? It appears to me from these figures, either that a large number of people who are not in receipt of relief acquiesced in the rule of the board of guardians, or that they were people who, if not independent ratepayers themselves, were in receipt of relief and have never exercised their franchise. These figures, I think, do show undoubtedly that the charge that the present, board of guardians was elected corruptly by the people who were themselves seeking relief is unfounded, in view of the large number of people who did not exercise their voting powers at the last election.
One would have thought the Government would have agreed to a further election to test public opinion rather than to supersede the local authority. It is well to know what precisely the Government is going to do in placing this Bill on the Statute Book. Is it to be applied to West Ham only, or to the other long list of boards of guardians who have now reached the end of their financial resources? Because what it comes to is: not that boards of guardians are to be superseded because of proved malpractices, or because they are unfit to discharge their duties, but because, by sheer accident in their particular areas, all their resources from the rates are for the time being inadequate to meet the demand made upon them. In other words this Bill, once it is brought into operation, will, in practice, be brought into operation only because the unions are in financial difficulties. For the most part those unions will be unions where there is a large amount of poverty, because their reserves are exhaustive, and because they are poor and have fallen into the clutches of the right hon. Gentleman. In other words the curse of the poor is their poverty, and the
poorer they are the more readily will they come under the provisions of this Bill.
Two months ago, during the great strike, the sacred name of democracy was invoked. The strike was regarded by some as a challenge to democratic government. We believe that this Bill is as great or even a greater challenge to democratic government. I should like to remind the House as to what was said on this point of constitutional government during those days. That great organ of British opinion now deceased, the "British Gazette," said every day:
Believe nothing until you see it in the British Gazette.' 
These are some of the things said eminent people on this question of constitutional government, and reported in the "British Gazette." Viscount Grey in that paper said:
It is by democratic government that liberty has been won; by this alone can it be maintained. The alternatives are Fascism or Communism. Both of these are hostile and fatal to liberty.
That is our charge against this Bill. The right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health has chosen the alternative of Fascism. Earl Balfour in the same illustrious organ of Government opinion said:
Revolutionary methods would be completely powerless except for evil.
We regard this Bill as a revolutionary Measure. We believe that its result will be evil, and nothing but evil. What in those days was said by the Prime Minister? He used these words:
Constitutional government is being attacked. … The laws of England are the people's birthright. The laws are in your keeping.
But the Minister of Health proposes to take the laws out of the keeping of the people who have been democratically elected for the purpose! It seems to me the explanation of this different attitude of mind on two occasions, separated by only a few weeks, is, largely, panic. In a further issue of the "British Gazette," Mr. Rudyard Kipling is quoted in these words:
From panic, pride and terror,
Revenge that knows no law,
Light, haste and lawless error,
Protect us yet again.
That is our plea against this Bill. We ask to be protected against panic, pride
and the terror of the Government, from their revenge upon local authorities who are ill-equipped with resources, and we object to the haste and the lawless error of the right hon. Gentleman. A few days ago the Minister of Health defended the Coal Mines Bill in this passage:
The Bill would not compel anybody to work eight hours, but it allows miners to do so if they choose. The idea of allowing people to do what they like had shocked the Socialist party.
The ides of West Ham doing what it likes has shocked the right hon. Gentleman. The party opposite are prepared on one occasion to invoke freedom and liberty and constitutional government; and on another occasion, for motives which are perhaps not obscure, they are prepared to discard them—unless they can be invoked in furtherance of their own policy. It has been repeatedly said that this Bill is based upon the situation in West Ham. If it is true that it has been introduced solely to deal with the situation in West Ham, it is a preposterous and complicated way of handling that problem. To think that the whole engine of legislation should be brought into play by the Imperial Parliament to deal with a small body of people in West Ham! It is an affront to the dignity of this House, and an exhibition of the right hon. Gentleman's bankruptcy.
If, however, the Bill is intended to deal with more than West Ham it is a really revolutionary Measure, which strikes at the root of local government in this country, because the right hon. Gentleman could, next week, if the Bill were then law, entirely destroy for the time being one-tenth of the boards of guardians in this country. If the Bill is intended merely as a temporary Measure we might well have spent our time on other questions. I understood from what the right hon. Gentleman said yesterday the Bill was intended only to last as long as hoards of guardians.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I said it could last only as long, because when there were no more guardians there could be no defaulting guardians.

Mr. GREENWOOD: The right hon. Gentleman also re-affirmed the Government's intention to introduce legislation to deal with boards of guardians next year. The Coal Mines Bill, which was
given a lease of life of five years, was described as a temporary Bill, but this Bill is to be even more temporary than that, and I think the right hon. Gentleman ought to have found another way of dealing with this problem.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Can you suggest one?

Mr. GREENWOOD: At this stage in the proceedings it would not be right for me to do so; indeed, it would not be in order for me to do so. If the right hon. Gentleman had given us longer time for Debate on the earlier stages of the Bill we should have been delighted to do so.
If the Bill is not a temporary Bill, what is the position going to be? The Minister has said that this Bill could not continue in operation longer than boards of guardians continue to exist. I hope that may he taken as a quite definite pledge on his part that he does not intend, when he introduces his Poor Law Measure next year, to render it possible in any way to coerce municipal authorities, who in future will he exercising the functions of boards of guardians.

Mr. LANSBURY: And who may want loans.

Mr. GREENWOOD: Yes, and who may want loans. We have never had that undertaking given. If there is a shadow of doubt as to whether or not this Bill can be used in the future to coerce local authorities, it is a dangerous Bill, and we ought to ponder long over it before passing it. Yesterday when a question was put from these benches asking whether, if the West Ham Town Council would not levy rates, they would be superseded, there were loud, though unofficial, answers in the affirmative from back-benchers opposite. I have no doubt many hon. Members opposite would be glad to suppress the West Ham Town Council and glad to suppress every Labour local authority in the country, and a Bill which begins that kind of policy is obviously a dangerous one. Hon. Members opposite would not be entitled to grumble if some succeeding Governments used that power for purposes of their own.
This Bill, though it is a constitutional revolution, is really part of the Govern-
ment's financial policy. This is a second Economy Bill. It has no other object. 'The right hon. Gentleman is prepared to work a far-reaching revolution in the machinery of local government merely for the purpose of carrying further the Government's economy plans. To do that is an abuse of the Government's Parliamentary majority. The Government have no mandate to introduce such a Measure. It was never discussed during the last General Election. The people of the country did not know that the right hon. Gentleman was harbouring schemes for destroying boards of guardians which he did not like, and it is unwarrantable that the Government should press upon the House a Measure of this kind. I wish to say frankly that I think this Bill reveals a spirit which is un-British. It is inverted Communism. It is Fascism. I cannot believe the resources of the right hon. Gentleman and the resources of the Civil Service—the ablest Civil Service in the world—are exhausted because of the deadlock which has been reached between the Government and a single board of guardians. If they are exhausted, present Ministers are unfitted longer to hold office. If a recalcitrant authority—assuming it were such—cannot be dealt with by Ministers without these large constitutional changes, then they certainly are not competent for their duties. This Bill is based on the theory that the Minister of Health knows how to govern West Ham better than do the people in West Ham.

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN: Agreed!

Mr. LANSBURY: Rubbish!

Mr. GREENWOOD: The people of West Ham do not think so, but, at any rate, that is the view on which it is based. It is a view which has never been accepted in this country that any external authority outside a local area is better able to govern that area than the people in their own district. The Bill is a denial of every democratic constitutional principle. If the Government persist, which I have no doubt they will, in carrying this Measure through the House of Lords, as they have done through the House of Commons, of course it will reach the Statute Book. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] Right hon. Gentlemen and hon. Members opposite who seem to view that as a pleasant prospect will have a rude awakening one day, because there is
nobody able to speak for local authorities who will give any support whatever to this Measure, and the Government are taking very grave risks. Of course, that is their own look-out.
I am concerned more with the larger constitutional issues raised by this Bill, and I venture to say that within living memory there has been no Bill dealing with constitutional questions which could have been so dangerous as the Bill which is now before the House, and I say, when it reaches the Statute Book it will be a blot upon it. I am sorry to think that the Minister of Health—who was nurtured in municipal government, and whose distinguished father was one of the greatest of our municipal administrators, and who himself has had considerable experience of local administration—in a panic is prepared to throw aside all he has learned throughout his life, and is acting in a way which is unconstitutional and unworthy of the Minister of the Crown.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I beg to second the Amendment.
Had the question with regard to administration by the Board of Guardians in West Ham been one of malpractices solely, this Measure would never have been brought forward. Although much was made when the Bill was introduced about alleged malpractices and corruption in West Ham, the real essence of the Bill is the default of the West Ham Board of Guardians, and it is very desirable that we should divide the two questions, that of the financial position of the West Ham Board of Guardians and the alleged practices which are supposed to suggest a certain measure of corruption in that Poor Law union. With regard to the question of relief and the standard of treatment of those who apply for Poor Law relief under the Poor Law guardians, I would like to put this to the Minister of Health. He will not grant a loan to that particular union because he insists on their standard of living being lowered. That standard of living means a maximum of 55s. per week for a man, his wife and six children as a maximum. If this were just an ordinary question of the relief of the destitute or the relief of those people who are not able to make their way in the world, degenerate or incompetent people, there might be some case made
out for a lower standard than that. Personally, I would rather say that such people deserve to be treated with generosity as well as anybody else, but the position here is that you have a peculiar state of affairs in West Ham, and a condition of things where there is a vast reserve of labour required in the district. That is what I want to insist upon, and I base my main argument upon it. It is not a question of destitution prima facie, but of competent able-bodied people who can work and are willing to work, and are there as a, reserve army of labour which is required to keep the industries of West Ham going.
We hear something about the big dock proprietors and companies and factory owners in that district who are compelled to pay big rates and who have no power of determining the policy of the West Ham Poor Law Union. That may be good or it may be bad. There is a lot to be said about that, but I want to say that these big companies do get their dividends out of West Ham, and are able to carry on because of the existence of this army of able-bodied reserve labour. The policy of the West Ham Socialists—and it is a political question more than anything else—and all the Socialists all over the country under those circumstances is that if work cannot be found—these people are willing to give their services to the community—it is not too much to ask, as a reserve of labour is required, that maintenance upon some decent standard, not upon a pauperisation standard, but one under which the people can live decently and under decent conditions. That we say is only reasonable and it particularly applies to the conditions prevailing in West Ham at the present moment. The Board of Guardians of the West Ham Poor Law Union took up the position that there should be no generosity, because 55s. a week is not generous, but that the thing should be regarded from the ordinary standard of Poor Law relief. That is a different question. West Ham is an industrial centre of a particular type and we say that the standard of living under those circumstances should be adequate for the maintenance of the people. On the top of that we come to the argument that there
is corruption at election times because Socialist candidates go out to the street corners and to public meetings and say that if the people will vote for them they will give them a generous scale of Poor Law relief. That has been called corruption. That is rather an unfortunate expression under any circumstances because it is not corruption at all.
It is a desirable thing that that lever should exist with regard to this vast army of reserve able-bodied labour, and surely that only brings us down to the real fundamentals of the whole situation as to the political aspect of the case. What do we expect the Socialists to do in an election but to tell the people, or anybody else, that they are willing and are going to grant a decent standard and a definite standard of relief under these circumstances? If you want to avoid the implication of corruption, then you must regard the question as a national one, not merely going from this House of Commons or from a Department of State to interfere under these peculiar circumstances, but accept the responsibility nationally for the maintenance of those who are wanted in the district and are willing to work, but for whom work cannot be regularly found. The only way out of the question is to regard it as of national consideration. I am prepared to admit that they are malpractices—I do not think that they have been proved to exist in West Ham or anywhere else—that it is quite competent and right for the House of Commons to interfere and to do it in the most efficient way it can. There is no democratic argument in saying that a local authority can do precisely as it likes on every occasion and under every circumstance. Every sensible person must agree that the House of Commons must be supreme. But that is not the argument for this Bill, because the House of Commons or the Department.of State can deal efficiently and effectually with any real malpractices that may be occurring in West Ham or anywhere else.
This Bill is not brought in to deal with malpractices at all. It is brought in definitely to reduce the standard of relief in West Ham and elsewhere. I have admitted that this so-called corruption is an undesirable thing. It is unquestionably undesirable that there should be any
lever of that local character whereby candidates can make definite offers, though I do not think it has been done in any corrupt fashion at all. I am perfectly sure that the Labour party in West Ham or anywhere else are not to be any more charged with malpractices or corruption than any other party in local government, and I speak as one having had some experience of local government. If you want to deal with it properly, then take the whole question out of the hands of the West Ham Board of Guardians or any other boards of guardians, and realise that it is a national question due to the economic condition of the country. It is not an ordinary Poor Law consideration or an ordinary question of Poor Law relief, but is a question, especially in West Ham and other big industrial centres, of capitalism being unable to deal with its own reserve army of labour. These people are not going to be treated as paupers while we can help it, but we are going to see that they have something approaching a decent standard of life.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: The speech of the hon. Member for West Islington (Mr. Montague), in seconding the rejection of the Bill was much more impressive than the speech of the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. A. Greenwood) who moved. The speech of the proposer seemed to me like a thunder storm with a great deal of thunder and very little lightning.

Mr. W. THORNE: You did not get much of a laugh out of that.

Mr. WILLIAMS: No, because the people who would have appreciated it are not here. The Seconder referred to the reserve army of labour in West Ham. That may be a fair description, but it is probably the case that the number of reserves has been somewhat added to by the policy of the West Ham Board of Guardians. He urged that his party took the view that if work cannot be found there should be maintenance of a decent standard. He was, however, dealing with unemployment, and the relief of unemployment to-day is not mainly the function of the boards of guardians. We have devised other means of dealing with that problem, namely, unemployment insurance. When the party to which he
belongs was in office, they introduced an amending Bill which made certain changes. In fact, they made certain increases in the amount of benefit. If my recollection is correct, the rate of benefit for a man was raised by 3s., and the benefit in respect of a child was increased from 1s. to 2s. [Interruption.] We are dealing at the moment with the rate when people are drawing the benefit. If the hon. Member was logical and consistent, and believed in this matter being dealt with nationally and in an adequate standard being provided, that was the time to take the proper steps. Of course, the proper steps were not taken at that time, because it would have involved very much higher rates of contributions, and the party to which he belongs was not prepared to face the unpopularity of asking for higher rates of contribution. They know perfectly well that the great mass of the workers do not believe in these high rates of relief when there is unemployment. They believe in a moderate rate of relief, and they also believe that it should be more profitable to be at work than out of work.
The hon. Member for West Islington seemed to regard this Bill as being directed solely at the scales of relief. I am inclined to think it is not only the scale which is the problem. There is also the problem of the numbers of people in receipt of relief from the guardians. I attempted, by means of certain statistics, when speaking on the Second Reading, to show that for some mysterious reason the ratio of unemployed persons who get Poor Law relief in West Ham, in addition to the insurance benefit, is very much higher than in other areas. It is very difficult to get satisfactory comparisons, because the areas of Employment Exchanges and of Poor Law guardians are not in many cases co-terminous, but a careful examination of the figures does establish the fact quite clearly that the boards of guardians who have got themselves into difficulties have done so because they have encouraged numbers of people to apply for relief who would never have dreamed- of doing so but for speeches delivered at street corners.
3.0 P.M.
We were told by the mover of the rejection of the Bill that it was a revolutionary measure striking at the root of
local government. It is not this Bill which has struck at the root of local government; it is those who have abused local government. There is no form of local government which has any right to continue unless it is carried on in an efficient and fair way. The moral justification for any form of local government is that it works smoothly, and, broadly speaking, satisfactorily, and here we have a case where it has failed. The guardians cannot carry on. They have not the wherewithal to do so, and they want to be in the happy position of distributing largesse among other people without having the responsibility of finding the money. That is where the breakdown has occurred. The hon. Member, in moving the rejection of the Bill, quoted certain electoral statistics with regard to the guardians' election in the West Ham Union. I was not able to take them down, but I recognised one or two areas, such as Wanstead and Woodford, and I think, broadly speaking, in the areas which returned very definitely Red guardians there was in a great many cases no contests, and no contests for the very obvious reasons that it has become recognised that is is perfectly futile to attempt to contest them in view of the conditions which have prevailed, and in view of what has been described in this House as corruption. It is not legal corruption, but it is corruption in the broad sense in promising to the electors these benefits provided only that Socialists are returned.

Mr. MARDY JONES: What about Protection?

Mr. WILLIAMS: Protection is a definite policy. It is not a policy under which money is promised to individuals if they vote in a certain way, but it does promise to give legislative sanction to certain things, and it urges that, if that happen, certain consequences will follow logically. That is entirely different from the deliberate handing out of large sums of money week by week to the individuals who cast the votes. So far as I am aware, there have been few legislative proposals put before the country that have contained that kind of promise. Neither the Liberal party nor the Conservative party, in the main, have indulged in that kind of electioneering promise. The hon.
Gentleman who moved the rejection said that it was merely an accident that the resources of West Ham were inadequate in relation to the demands made upon it; but I think that if the hon. Gentleman, who has had experience of municipal government, and who was Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health in the last Government, had considered the conditions which prevail in other local government areas, he would have found areas which have had problems of unemployment far more grave than anything that West Ham has known at any time since the Armistice.

Mr. W. THORNE: Where?

Mr. WILLIAMS: I will take the constituency in which I was a candidate in the Black Country, where 40 per cent of the insured population were out of work in 1922.

Mr. THORNE: Is the hon. Member aware that the condition in West Ham in 1922 was worse than it is now.

Mr. WILLIAMS: In 1922, quite obviously, it was worse than it is now; it was worse everywhere in 1922 than it is now—and by "now" I mean the condition as it was before the general strike. In 1922 there were great areas in this country which were suffering from unemployment far in excess of anything that London or Greater London has known. Greater London is not an area which has been very badly affected by unemployment, compared with what has prevailed on the North-East Coast and in large areas of the Midlands. The hon. Member for East Ham North (Miss Lawrence) objects to my remark. Of course, if she is not acquainted with what has happened elsewhere, that is not my fault; but it is notorious that the worst areas of unemployment are those areas in which the heavy industries are carried on, particularly the iron and steel industry and various branches of the heavy engineering industry. Those areas have been really plagued with unemployment, and yet in most of those areas the guardians have had the courage to say, "No." My grievance against the guardians of West Ham and Poplar is that they have lacked the courage to say "No," and the essential basis of democratic government is the courage to say "No." The reason why the Socialist party fails in this and
in other countries is that it never has the courage to say "No," and tell the people the real truth in this matter. On the Second Reading I said that I should vote for this Bill with very great pleasure, and it will be with even greater pleasure that I shall vote to-day for its Third Reading.

Mr. MacLAREN: I have not intervened during the stages through which this Bill has gone, but have been watching quite keenly all the same. To rid this discussion, so far as it has gone, of the mere pettifogging details which concern West Ham, I think it is incumbent on us to get down to the real causes for this Bill being here at all. The Conservative party are menaced, consciously or unconsciously, with the towering growth of taxation and local rates in this country. They know that they are going up, and they are attempting all devices to get them down, but they know that, in spite of all their actions, rates are creeping up, and now we have £140,000,000 odd in rates to meet this year, and possibly more next year. They know instinctively, although they may not reason it out in this House, that the industries of this country are gradually being impeded in their growth and extension by this constant growth of taxation. For a long time West Ham has been a by-word, a sort of scapegoat among local authorities in this country, and so the occasion is brought in now that something has happened at West Ham, and we are going to make a moral people by Acts of Parliament; so we will introduce this Bill, nominally to deal with West Ham, when as a matter of fact it is but the precursor of action that the Government propose in the near future, for holding in check the expenditure of local government bodies.
I want to say in passing that a lesson which we ought to learn and never forget is that the danger to democracy is the centralisation of finance. When you centralise your finance you create a gap between the taxpayer and ratepayer and those who expend the money, and it is one of the saving graces of this or any other country that there is an interest taken in local areas where vast sums of money are spent in this way. But this Bill proposes to give the Minister power to check the prodigality of local authorities. It has been asked, if there is this delinquency in West Ham, what is our alternative. How can we deal with it?
There are many ways of dealing with it other than by instituting a Bill which is national in character. This Bill does not stop at West Ham, or anywhere else. I have heard much talk to-day and yesterday about corruption. I have had some short experience of local government and my experience has proved to me that they are not angels who go into local government, and if there is going to be a searching for corruption I am afraid the right hon. Gentleman will be very busy for the next year or so because he will find plenty of work to do in putting this Bill into operation. I could tell him of local authorities which are not Socialist in character or Radical in colour at all, but for corruption they might teach West Ham a good deal. I have been in contact with it in Stoke-on-Trent. I could a tale unfold there which would make the people of West Ham look like amateurs. So that if you are going to deal with West Ham as a body of people who have overstepped themselves you might have done it by some other method than this.
There is another point which hon. Members opposite must know. It is not the thing spoken to you, it is the unseen things which are felt that inspire men to speak at all. Unemployment is growing. I wonder what the Minister will do with the Bill by way of dealing with the necessitous conditions of these various areas. Does he really contend that by this Bill he is going to cut off liberal supplies that might have gone to those in distress? This distress is with us whether we like it or not. It is high time Governments were beginning to ask themselves how far the very method they pursue in imposing their taxation and rating is giving rise to the very diseases they are trying to cope with. This unemployment is growing, in my opinion, by virtue of the very machinery of taxation and rating which is in force. Here we are in a vicious circle. Local authorities up and down the country are facing bankruptcy if this thing goes on. The Minister is making a scapegoat of West Ham and proceeds with a Bill of this kind. In reality it is the foreshadowing of a policy, which, in my opinion, they hope to pursue in the future, of curtailing the expenditure of local authorities. It is true we are told we cannot allow this lavish expenditure, because if it continues it means that
one-half of the population will be living on the rates of the other half. That is a question I should like to follow up, but it would go rather wide of the mark. I do not wish to suggest what lines the Government ought to pursue in order to get away from this impasse into which they are gradually getting. What we are witnessing at West Ham, and in almost every local authority in the country, is the natural outcome of the system of rating and taxation, and this tinkering Measure will never relieve it. It will only create suspicion, aggravate the minds of the people whose affairs are to be administered, and do nothing but make matters worse. I am hoping that with the growth of intelligence outside and by the return to this House of men and women who will be inspired with the idea that in this House we can do something of a radical character, we may change the incidence of rating and taxation which is doing such devilish things to-day, and is driving a Conservative Government to tricks of this kind. I hope the day will not be far distant when men and women will have power in this House to deal radically with these deep-rooted causes which are giving rise to these effects and to Bills of this kind, which are not even palliatives, which are mere pretexts and which cannot be apologised for. The Government are trying to deal with certain diseases, but they are only making them worse by these methods. It is difficult in dealing with a transitory Measure of this kind to try to get back to the fundamental principles and to find what are he generic causes which give rise to these diseases in society. I will content myself with protesting against the action of the Government in making a scapegoat of a poor distressed area and hoping to accomplish anything in the nature of sane administration by a Bill of this kind.

Colonel VAUGHAN - MORGAN: We have listened with interest to the attempt of the hon. Member to turn the subject of his discourse into a discussion of a topic in which he takes a peculiar interest. There are certain aspects of this question with which he dealt to which I would like to refer. He pointed out that the disease with which West Ham has to deal grows with the means Which West Ham has been in the habit of using in
order to remedy it. We must bear in mind that prevention is better than cure, and that however successful the cure may be, it is necessary to get rid of the origin of the disease. The cause of the difficulty with which West Ham has to contend is the policy which West Ham has pursued. The policy which West Ham has adopted has created and tended to enlarge the very difficulty with which it asserts its desire and even maintains its ability to deal.
As far as this Bill is concerned, the Minister has been challenged on several counts. Efforts have been made to suggest that alternative methods were at his choice had he chosen to adopt them. We have only to read the right hon. Gentleman's speech on the Second Reading to see that he has already considered the alternatives. There is in the Statute Law at the present time no alternative beyond that which this Bill proposes for dealing with the difficulty with which we are now faced. That difficulty is not a difficulty which may be summarised as "striking at the roots of local government." What we are hoping to do is to stimulate and strengthen local government in this particular area.

Mr. MacLAREN: Does this Bill do that?

Colonel VAUGHAN - MORGAN: It restores the freedom of the inhabitants of that area. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Yes, by giving them an opportunity of good administration. They are suffering from lack of good administration, and they are entitled to have it. If they cannot secure it for themselves, it is the duty of the Government to secure it for them. The hon. Member for West Islington (Mr. Montague) dealt with this difficulty from very much the same standpoint from which I regard it. He drew attention to the extent of unemployment. I hold the view that unemployment is worse in West Ham than it otherwise would be because the lavish scale of outdoor relief does not induce a desire for work, and, secondly, because heavy rates must tend to increase unemployment.

Mr. BARNES: Will the hon. Member inform the House how people since 1920 have been able to get houses in the West Ham area and move into the borough?

Colonel VAUGHAN-MORGAN: I am afraid if the housing problem was solely confined to the actual number of houses in existence, the problem would not be as difficult as it is. My information tends to show that even if the number of houses had not increased the number of people occupying them has. Reference has been made to the question of standard and scale. It is not a question of scale or of standard so much as a question of administration. The Minister of Health in his statement drew attention to the defective administration in West Ham and the fact that too lavish allowance was given in cases where destitution did not exist and where the standard was already sufficiently high not to need the assistance. The hon. Member has dealt with the question from a different point of view from that which Poor Law guardians are bound to regard it. Their function is to relieve destitution. That is the law. They have a discretion, but their function is to deal with destitution and not to set up a certain standard or scale of life or lay down a certain figure which they regard as the figure which a family should have.

Mr. MONTAGUE: The Act of Queen Elizabeth states that guardians must give adequate assistance. What is the meaning of the word "adequate"?

Colonel VAUGHAN-MORGAN: There have been Statutes subsequent to 43 Elizabeth. We have the Act of 1834, and there has been legislation since that date, in which it is clearly laid down that the function of a Poor Law authority is to relieve destitution and not to supplement a standard which they may regard as being too low. If you take the Statute of Elizabeth you find something is said about people being found work, and the Act of 1834 includes regulations about the institution of workhouses. We are not discussing these points now and we must try and look at what is the plain, simple issue. Extravagant out-door relief increases and emphasises the very difficulty which a sympathetic administration has to deal with, and the more extravagant you are the more difficult you make the attainment of the very object you have in view.

Mr. MAROY JONES: I should not intervene in this Debate if this Bill was merely intended to be confined to the
West Ham Union and the alleged maladministration of affairs by that board of guardians. In my opinion this Bill has been brought in with an ulterior motive. The West Ham Union has been the subject of much criticism for many years past, and the Minister of Health, who was in office in 1923 and has been in office since the present Government came in, has had several opportunities of bringing pressure on the West Ham Union with regard to these things, whether they are true or not. Hon. Members who represent London constituencies have dealt with many of these criticisms. There are many Poor Law unions in the country which are open to the same kind of charge of alleged maladministration, and there are certainly 60 or 70 unions which are necessitous in the same way and for the same reason as West Ham. On many occasions, for years past, it has been pointed out that the root difficulty in local government, so far as it concerns the relief of the needy poor, is that we are suffering from abnormal conditions, and have been so suffering since the Great War came to an end. The percentage of unemployment, which in normal conditions is never more than 2, 3 or 4 per cent., has become as high as 10, 12 and 15 per cent., and when you take particular years, is 40, 50 and even 70 per cent. of the entire industrial population of an area. It is remarkable that if we analyse the degree of unemployment and the burden of Poor relief throughout the country, we find that the great majority of what we now call necessitous areas, are geographically situated in the greatest industrial centres that are concerned most largely with our foreign trade. It is the shipping centres, the iron and steel and engineering centres, and those coalfields which export one-third to one-half or more of the total output, which suffer chiefly from this burden of high Poor relief, unemployment and so on.
It is because these heavy industries are very sensitive to the fluctuations of international trade that we are in this position. It is very unfair that the Poor Law authorities and the ratepayers in those necessitous areas should be called upon to bear the alarming rate burdens that they have to meet. It is not due to any maladministration in West Ham or any other part of the country that
they have these high rates. It simply happens that the masses of the industrial population have to live near their places of employment, and that these particular industries are so sensitive to the fluctuations of international trade. We all know that for the past five or six years international trade, relatively to home trade, has been very depressed. We say that the burden of national unemployment should be borne, not out of the rate revenues of the necessitous areas, but out of national revenue, and should be made a national charge because it is a national evil. The Bill does not affect the situation at all. It is true that the Minister, in his opening speech when introducing the Bill, told a long tale of certain malpractices of the West Ham Board of Guardians. If he had scanned other unions he would have found something similar in other areas. He would have found that of which he complains, in the area represented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health.

Sir K. WOOD: That is a Labour board of guardians.

Mr. JONES: If the Minister would only appoint a Committee of inquiry to go thoroughly into the whole question, he would find that there is much more of it in other parts where there are few or no Labour members on the local authorities. All the necessitous areas of the country have been appealing to the Government for a long time past to put this matter right.. It is true they appointed the Goschen Committee, and that Committee has not recommended the particular scheme known as the West Ham scheme. The fact that the scheme was so called prejudiced the Government against it right away, independent of its merits. But it is remarkable that all the necessitous areas of the country strongly supported it. If that scheme, for practical reasons, was not effective and did not bring about the right results, it was the duty of the Government to bring forward an alternative scheme. They have not attempted to do so. To-day the Minister seeks to give the public the impression that this Bill is only going to apply to West Ham in the first place, and is not likely to extend beyond, possibly, two or three other boards. That may be
the right hon. Gentleman's personal conviction, but I respectfully point out that it is not the impression which has been created in the minds of the officials and guardians in many of the necessitous areas in the country. They have read into his Bill something much more than the Minister admits.
Having listened to the right hon. Gentleman's own statements, I have read into the Bill much more than he is prepared to admit. It is obvious to me, from their correspondence with boards of guardians in mining areas and from Circular 703, that the Government anticipate that this coal stoppage may last a long time. Therefore, the Minister has told the guardians in those areas that they are to limit their expenditure in accordance with the possibility of a prolonged stoppage. It may not be familiar to hon. Members that while the rate revenue in all necessitous areas is a serious burden, in the mining districts it is particularly serious, because the bulk of the rate revenue for all local authorities, including guardians, in coalfield areas is secured out of the output of coal. That is the chief source of revenue, and when the collieries are at a standstill there is no revenue coming in from that source, while all the small business people and tradespeople and the other ratepayers who are, in the main, miners, have no income and there is no means of paying the guardians.
Let me give an illustration which applies to all necessitous areas, but particularly to the coal districts. Most of these authorities have collected the bulk of the revenue due for the half-year ended 31st March and, so far, they are all right, in spite of the fact that they have a very heavy rate to pay in that half-year. The current half-year from 1st April last to 30th September next is the half-year for which they are now beginning to collect the money, and it is impossible for them to get in their revenue for that period in the normal way. The. information which I have from the board of guardians in my own area—the Pontypridd Union, which is the second largest in the United Kingdom, covering the, central portion of the South Wales coalfield—is that they have not been able to secure, up to date, more than 10 per cent. of the total revenue for the current half-year. They cannot
hope to get more than another 5 per cent. to 10 per cent. during the present half-year because of the coal stoppage and its possible continuance for weeks or months yet. Even if it were to go through successfully, as I hope it will, and end in a wage agreement before long, nevertheless the stoppage will result in the present half-year in a loss of revenue to these bodies. It is doubtful if they will get 50 per cent. of it, even after waiting for a long period.
All these boards have to come to the Minister for loans to enable them to provide the necessary poor relief for the wives and children of the miners who are locked out. In my own union of Pontypridd, the normal poor relief is less than £5,000 per week, but at present it is above £20,000, and in the nature of things it is bound to increase by a thousand or two each week as time goes on, assuming the stoppage continues, and that, not on a high scale of relief such as has been quoted for West Ham, but on a very low scale. The last time that this board went to the Minister for a £20,000 loan, he used his position and power to induce them to reduce their scales of relief to 10s. for the wife and 2s. per child. I say that that was taking a very unfair advantage of the financial difficulties of this board of guardians, and what applies to Pontypridd applies generally, within 6d. or ls., to all the mining areas as a result of the screw that is being put on by the Ministry in this matter. How can any woman, with the present cost of living, in any coalfield in Britain, exist on 10s. a week, and how can she keep her child, a growing child, that needs more attention and nutriment than even an adult person, in a certain sense, be properly treated and kept in health on 2s. a week?
There is another feature to which we take very strong objection. This relief has to be given in kind practically always. In some cases there is a certain amount of cash permitted, but very little, and it is only permitted to purchase certain articles of food, but the mothers with two, three, four, five or six young children to look after have, in practice, to think of something in addition to the food, because even in the districts where the education authorities are feeding the children—the majority, I believe, two meals a day, and in other cases three meals—even where that is done, and the
burden of actually feeding the children of school age is taken from the family, the fact remains that every one of these children, if it is to be properly educated, must be kept healthy in body and mind, land food is only the first necessity. In addition, the child needs clothing and a pair of boots, and, unfortunately, the situation is now becoming very acute in all the mining areas. The boots that they had in good condition when the stoppage began have been worn out, and many of them are in a very ragged condition for going to school, and without proper footwear. As long as the summer weather lasts, it may mean a minimum of discomfort, but even with the present. weather there are very many hard cases in every mining area, and if we should get a very cold snap of weather or heavy rain, thousands of these young children would be placed in a very serious condition of health as a result.
Will the Minister not reconsider his policy on this matter? If he considers that the 10s. and 2s. must be adhered to, I would ask him to make an extra relief grant in kind, of boots and shoes, in all cases where the local guardians are satisfied that they should be granted, and in other cases of clothing for the body. Unless this provision is made, the public money spent, even in feeding the children to enable them to attend school, is largely vitiated, and the other money spent out of public funds, out of the local education rates and the annual grants of the Board of Education, is money that will be largely wasted on the children, because they will not be in a condition to receive their proper education because of these defects. What the Minister says with regard to the functions of the guardians in relieving necessitous cases is not our interpretation of the law. The law has been clear ever since the days of Queen Elizabeth. There has been no variation in the law from that day to this, and that law makes it very clear that it is the bounden duty of the guardians in every parish to relieve every necessitous case, irrespective of the reasons and the causes which have led to that necessity. It is true the Merthyr Tydvil judgment has now come along and has whittled that relief down, but, even with that limitation, I venture to say the Ministry and the Government are not doing their duty.
Why, then, has the Bill been brought in at the present time Without hesitation, I say the sole reason for bringing in this Bill is to put pressure upon boards of guardians throughout the country, particularly in the mining areas. This Bill is only one of three stages in the screw which the Government are putting on the miners. In the first place, the Government for months past have been tightening and tightening the regulations dealing with the administration of unemployment benefit, solely for the same purpose. They have been tampering with these things. Then they have just passed through Parliament the Eight Hours Bill, which is another screw to force the miners to work extra hours, so as to enable the royalty owners and the coalowners to live on their backs. 'This Bill is the third stage. It reminds one of the Thugs in India. It is to throttle local government, and compel the guardians to toe the line.
That is really the substance of the policy, and I think it is a national disgrace that Members of Parliament attached to any political party should not see through the fact that it is the policy of the Government to use all the machinery at their command in local and national government to try, somehow, to force the miners into subjection, and into accepting starvation conditions. That is the intention. Otherwise, why bring in this Bill? On either ground, the whole Bill is an abrogation of the principle of local government. Local government is a thing which has grown up in this country for a longer period even than national government, and we have always prided ourselves up to now that it is the local inhabitants, who know local conditions, who shall judge what shall be spent in this direction. That is now being challenged in this Bill. This is a defiance of democracy, and a striking example of autocracy. The Minister of Health is the new British Mussolini so far as he goes, though he is not yet up to the level of the Italian. He has not yet got the British Army and Navy at his disposal, but, as far as he can, he has certainly adopted the same tactics and the same methods. The precedent which he is laying down in this Bill will act as a boomerang, and his party will have cause to regret it in years to come. The
Government have brought in several useful precedents for us in this direction, and what is good for the Tories to-day may be very good for a Labour Government in the future. Instead of reducing the powers of local government, as they have done, we shall increase them, so that the landlord class, who now do not bear a fair share of rates on royalties and ground rents, will have to face the bill as well.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: In the few minutes that are left to me I should like to try to bring the House back again to the real issue which is before us, because some of the fantastic suggestions of hon. Members are far away from the point—the point we have to consider. We have not brought in a Bill of this kind until there was an absolute necessity for it. Had it not been for the contumacy of one particular board of guardians we need never have brought in this Measure at all. That is the answer to some of the statements of the hon. Members opposite. It has been said that it is a deliberate policy on the part of the Government, but it was in the power of the West Ham Board of Guardians to behave like other boards of guardians, and, by accepting the scale which we laid down, for them to have avoided legislation of this kind.
What is the real problem that we have got to face? Let me remind the House. The West Ham Board of Guardians time and again have come to the Ministry of Health and asked for loans to enable them to carry on the work of out-relief. As I said on the Second Reading of the Bill I know they are in a situation of exceptional difficulty. They are one of the board of guardians that have no claim on the Metropolitan Common Poor Fund and, therefore, it is necessary for us to give them special consideration. As has been explained, although it has been stated that we had no sympathy, we have shown them sympathy to the extent of lending them over £2,000,000, and they have run up a debt far in excess of other unions. This Bill is not intended to deal with the question of necessitous areas. They are not involved at all in the Bill. They will be dealt with when we bring forward the much larger measure on Poor Law reform. That will enable us, perhaps, to deal with these other problems of a similar kind upon an
equitable basis. Until legislation is placed upon the Statute Book we have to enable these unions to carry on.
But the position in this particular case is that we shall have to advance them money—not money raised in their area, but money provided by the general taxpayer. In those circumstances we say it is our duty to ensure that that money shall be spent in a reasonable way. The hon. Member for West Islington (Mr. Montague) recognised quite clearly that the rights of local government and democratic government have their limitations, and that there may be cases where it is necessary for some central authority to step in if the local authority are not carrying out their duties. That is precisely what has happened in this case. We have been obliged to intervene because the local authority have failed, or are about to fail, to carry out their functions. That is the problem we have to face. I said on Second Reading, and I repeat, that no Government faced with this position could afford to take the course which I think would be advocated by the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury), though I doubt whether it would be advocated by any responsibleperson—[HON. MEMBERS:
"Withdraw! ']—and that is that the Government should go on advancing money to any Board of Guardians ad libitum.

Mr. LANSBURY: Excuse me, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman what his authority is for that statement—the statement that I support the proposition that the Government should go on handing out money ad libitum? You read my speech and you will see what I said.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I was not in the House when the hon. Member spoke.

Mr. LANSBURY: Well, do not put words into my mouth which I never said.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary put a question to the hon. Member asking him whether he considered that the Government ought to go on advancing this money ad libitum, and I understand that the hon. Member said, "Yes."

Mr. LANSBURY: No.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If the hon. Member says that is not his position, of course I accept it.

Mr. LANSBURY: Of course it is not.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I thought the hon. Member was in a minority of one, but apparently he has joined the great majority, who agree that that is an impossible position, and that is the basis of my argument, that the position is impossible. The only thing we have to consider is whether the particular method adopted in this Bill is the right method for dealing with a situation of that kind. The hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Greenwood) quoted an observation which I made in a recent speech when I chaffed the Socialist, party with being horrified at the idea of allowing the miners to choose as they liked, and asked why we did not allow the people of West Ham to do as they liked. Could anybody think there was any analogy between the two cases, or be deceived by an argument of that kind? What is the essential difference between the Eight Hours Bill, as it is called, and the case of West Ham? The case for the Eight Hours Bill is that the miners are allowed to do as they like with their own labour.

HON. MEMBERS: No!

Mr. MARDY JONES: rose—

HON. MEMBERS: Order!

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The Eight Hours Bill is a permissive Measure. [Interruption.] In the case of the West Ham Guardians, what the hon. Member is saying is that they should be able to do as they like with other people's money. [Interruption.]

Mr. W. THORNE: If they could raise the money—[HON. MEMBERS "Order !"] —you could not—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]—that is the case—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

Mr. STEPHEN: On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. SPEAKER: The Minister who is speaking has declined to give way, and there is no point of Order.

Mr. STEPHEN: I wanted to draw your attention to the fact that such strange noises were coming from the party opposite.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I was dealing with that situation. On the Second Reading of the Bill, I said that I thought we were entitled, if hon. Members opposite did not approve of our proposals, to ask them to suggest a Measure of their own for dealing with this situation, and the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley said he could suggest one method. What was his remedy? Socialism. Is that any remedy for the emergency with which we are faced? Here is the Board of Guardians who, in a very short time, will be in a position of not being able to grant any relief at all, because they will have no funds. How is Socialism going to provide the funds? In the scheme contained in the Bill we have a method I hope will be found effective. So far from it being revolutionary or a novel proposal or one which strikes at the root of democratic government, it is one which has an ample precedent in the Education Act, 1870, which has been on the Statute Book for over 30 years, and which has been used on numerous occasions in this way. Therefore, I say it is no new proposal, but it is the one proposal which, in my judgment, will have a reasonable effect in saving local government from a condition of anarchy and chaos. In these circumstances, the Government have been faced with a position which, on the report of

Division No. 360.]
AYES.
[3.58 p.m.


Acland-Troyle, Lieut..Colonel
Brown, Brig,Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Cunliffe. Sir Herbert


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Buckingham, Sir H.
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry


Albery, Irving James
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Dalkeith, Earl of


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool.W. Derby)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Dalziel, Sir Davison


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopotd C. M. S.
Campbell. E. T.
Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cayzer.Maj.sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmtn. S.)
Davies, Dr. Vernon


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)


Atkinson, C.
Cecil. Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Dawson. Sir Philip


Balniel, Lord
Chadwick. Sir Robert Burton
Dean. Arthur Wellesley


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Eden, Captain Anthony


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Bennett, A. J.
Christie, J. A.
Edwards. J. Hugh (Accrington)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Elliot, Captain Walter E.


Berry, Sir George
Churchman. Sir Arthur C.
Elveden, Viscount


Betterton, Henry B.
Clayton, G. C.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston.s.M.)


Birchall. Major J. Dearman
Cobb. Sir Cyril
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Evans. Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Cockerill. Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Blades. Sir George Rowland
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Fairfax. Captain J. G.


Blundell, F. N.
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Fal[...]., Sir Bertram G.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cope, Major William
Falls, Sir Charles F.


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Cooper, J. B.
Fanshawe[...] Commander G. D.


Bowyer. Captain G. E. W.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Fermoy, Lord


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Courthope. Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Fielden. E. B.


Brass, Captain W.
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn., N.)
Finburqh, S.


Briscoe, Richard George
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Ford, Sir P. J.


Brittain. Sir Harry
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Fraser, Captain Ian


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Frece, Sir Walter de


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.

the auditors, shows there has undoubtedly been a grave abuse of the powers entrusted to the guardians. It is not merely a question of whether this or that amount is sufficient for a family to live upon, but it is a question of giving relief wholesale.[HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish!"]

Mr. W. THORNE: It is a lie!

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: This has taken place in many cases where no relief was required. It is a case of giving relief without proper investigation, as shown by the report of the auditors, in regard to the resources at the disposal of the guardians. When circumstances of that kind are brought to our notice, then I think the Measure we are proposing here is the one and only way to deal with he situation.
Several hon. Members rose—

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Commander Eyres Monsell): rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put. "That the Question be now put."

The House divided: Ayes, 278; Noes, 87.

Galbraith,.J. F. W.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Ropner, Major L.


Ganzonl, Sir John
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Gates, Percy
Looker, Herbert William
Rye, F. G.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Lord, Walter Greaves-
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Luce, Major-Gen, Sir Richard Harman
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Goff, Sir Park
Lumley, L. R
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Gower, Sir Robert
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W-)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Grant, Sir.J. A.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Savery, S. S.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Macintyre, Ian
Shepperson, E. W.


Greenwood, Rt.Hn.Sir H.(W'th's'w, E.)
McLean, Major A.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Macmillan, Captain H.
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's U niv.,Belfast)


Grotton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Macquisten, F. A.
Skelton, A. N.


Grotrian, H. Brent
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Smithers, Waldron


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Malone, Major P. B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hammersley, S. S.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Stanley. Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sdon, E.)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Metter, R. J.
Stanley, Hon. O.F.G. (Westm'eland)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Merriman, F. B.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Hartington, Marquess of
Meyer, Sir Frank
Stuart, Crichton., Lord C.


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Maine, J. S. Wardlaw.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hawke, John Anthony
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Headiam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. R. C. (Ayr)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Monre-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Morden, Col. W. Grant
Tinne, J. A.


Herbert,S. (York. N. R., Scar. & W h[...]'by)Moreing, Captain A. H.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hoare Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Murchison, C. K.
Ward, Lt.-Col.A.L (Kingston-on-Hull)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Neville. R. J.
Warner, Brigadier.General W. W.


Holland, Sir Arthur
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Holt, Captain H. P.
Newton, Sir D. G. C (Cambridge)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hope, Capt. A. O.J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carliste)


Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel.J. N.
Nicholson, Col. Rt.Hn.W.G.(Ptrsf[...]'ld.)
Wells, S. R.


Howard Captain Hon. Donald
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Whaler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hudson Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Oakley, T.
White, Lieut,Col. Sir G. Dalrymple


Hume, Sir G. H.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hurd, Percy A.
Pennefather, Sir John
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Hutchison,G.A.Clark(Midl[...]'n & P'bl's)
Penny, Frederick George
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Hiffe, Sir Edward M.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.
Peto. Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Con'l)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wise, Slr F redric


Jacob, A. E.
Philipson, Mabel
Withers, John James


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Wormer, Viscount


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Ramadan, E.
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Remer, J. R.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Remnant, Sir James



Knox, Sir Alfred
Rentoel, G. S.TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Major Sir Harry Barnston and


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Captain Margesson.

NOES.


Ammon, Charles George
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Jones. T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gardner,.J. P.
Kelly, W. T. 


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Gillett, George M.
Kennedy, T. 


Barr, J.
Gosling, Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Batey, Joseph
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lansbury, George


Bann, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawrence, Susan


Bowerman. Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lee. F. 


Broad, F. A.
Groves. T.
Lindley, F. W.


Bromley, J.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvi1)
Livingstone, A. M.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hardie, George D.
Lowth, T.


Cape, Thomas
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J. R.(Aberavon)


Charleton, H. C.
Hayes, John Henry
Mackinder, W.


Cluse, W. S.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
MacLaren, Andrew


Cove, W. G.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
March, S.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie
Montague, Frederick


Dalton, Hugh
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield).
Morrison,.R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Day, Colonel Harry
Jenkins. W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Oliver, George Harold


Dennison, R.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Patin, John Henry


Duncan, C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Potts, John S.


Dunnico H.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Purcell, A. A.

Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Scrymgeour, E.
Stamford, T. W.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Scurr, John
Stephen, Campbell
Westwood, J.


Sexton, James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Taylor, R. A.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Windsor, Waiter


Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Thurtle, E.
Wright, W.


Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rothethithe)
Tinker, John Joseph



Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Vlant, S. P.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


Snell, Harry
Walthead. Richard C.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.




A. Barnes.

Question put accordingly, "That the word ' now ' stand part of the Question." 83.

Division No. 361.]
AYES.
[4.8 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy


Albery, Irving James
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Dalkelth, Earl of
Holland, Sir Arthur


Alien, Sandeman (L'pool,W. Derby)
Dalziel, Sir Davison
Holt, Captain H. P.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Davidson,J.(Hertf'd, Hemet Hempst[...]'d)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.


Apsley, Lord
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent,Dover)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Hume, Sir G. H.


Atkinson, C.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hume-Wililams, Sir W. Ellis


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
 Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer


Balniel, Lord
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hurd, Percy A. 


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hutchison. G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Edwards, J, Hugh (Accrington)
little, Sir Edward M. 


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Bennett, A. J.
Elveden, Viscount
Jackson, Lieut.-Col. Rt. Hon. F. S.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Erskine, Lord (Sornerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Berry, Sir George
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Jacob, A. E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Everard, W. Lindsey
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Fairfax. Captain J. G.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Falls, Sir Bertram G.
Kindersley. Major G. M.


Blonde'', F. N.
Falls. Sir Charles F.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Fermoy, Lord
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Heiden, E. B.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Flnburgh, S.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Brass. Captain W.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Briscoe, Richard George
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Looker, Herbert William


Brittain, Sir Harry
Fraser, Captain Ian
Lord, Walter Greaves-


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Galbraith. J. F. W.
Lumley, L. R.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb[...]'y)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Gates, Percy
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Burgoyne, Lieut-Colonel Sir Alan
Gilmour. Lt.-Col. Rt, Hon. Sir John
Macintyre, I.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
McLean, Major A.


Campbell, E. T.
Goff, Sir Park
Macmillan, Captain H.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gower, Sir Robert
Macquisien, F. A.


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Grant. Sir J. A.
Mac Robert. Alexander M.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Maitland. Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Makins, Brigadler-General E.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Greenwood. Rt. Hn.Sir H. (W[...]'th's'w, E)
Malone, Major P. B.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Chlicott Sir Warden
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Waiter E.
Mason, Lieut,Colonel Glyn K.


Christie, J. A.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Meller. R. I


Churchman. Sir Arthur C.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Merriman, F. B.


Clayton, G. C.
Hail, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Meyer, Sir Frank


Cobb. Sir Cyril
Hammersley, S. S.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-


Cochrane Commander Hon. A. D.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Mitchell. S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir G. K.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Colfax, Major Wm. Phillips
Harrison, G. J. C.
Monsen, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hartington, Marquess of
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Couper, J. B.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth. Kennington)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Courtaufd, Major J. S.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Morden, Col. W. Grant


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hawke, John Anthony
Moreing, Captain A. H.


Cowan. Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootie)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Crack, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Murchison, C. K.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Neville, R. J.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Newman. Sir.R. H. S. D. L. (Exater)


Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt, Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)

The House divided: Ayes, 278; Noes,

Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Nicholson, Col. Rt. H n.W.G. (Ptrsf[...]'ld.)
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Ward, Lt.-Col.A.L (Kingston-on-Hull)


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Warner, Brigadler-General W. W.


Oakley, T.
Savery, S. S.
Warrender, Sir Victor


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Shepperson, E. W.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wells, S. R.


Pennefather, Sir John
Sinclair, Col.T. (Queen's Univ.,Bellst)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H


Penny, Frederick George
Skelton, A. N.
White, Lieut.-Col. Sir G. Dairymple


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Sianey, Major P. Kenyon
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Pato, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Smithers, Waldron
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm[...]'d)


Phillpson, Mabel
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Pilditch, Sir Philip
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Ramsden, E.
Stanley, Lord (Fyide)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Wise, Sir Fredric


Remer, J. R.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Withers, John James


Remnant, Sir James
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Wolmer, Viscount


Rentoul, G. S.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Wootwich, W.)


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Ropner, Major L.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell



Rye, F. G.
Tinne, J. A.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Major Cope and Captain Mar-


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
gesson.

NOES.


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scurr, John


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sexton, James


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barnes, A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Barr, J
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Siessar, Sir Henry H.


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Smith, H.B. Lees (Keighley)


Broad, F. A.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphllly)
Snell, Harry


Bromley, J.
Jones. T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Cape. Thomas
Kennedy, T.Stephen, Campbell


Charleton, H. C.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Cruse, W. S.
Lansbury, George
Taylor, R. A.


Cove, W. G.
Lawrence, Susan
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Thurtle, E.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lindley, F. W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Dennison, R.
Lewth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Duncan, C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J.R.(Aberavon)
Wellhead, Richard C.


Dunnico, H.
Mackinder, W.
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Gardner, J. P.
Mac Laren, Andrew
Wobb. Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gillett, George M.
March, S.
Westwood, J.


Gosling, Harry
Montague, Frederick
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Caine)
Morrison. R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Windsor, Walter


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Palin, John Henry
Wright, W.


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.



Hail, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Purcell, A. A.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hardie, George D.
Sakiatvala, Shapurji
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Scrymgeour, E
Hayes.

Bill read the Third time, and passed.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

WhereuponMr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 3.

Adjourned at Eighteen Minutes after Four o'Clock until Monday next (12th July).